Claude Neon Electrical Products, Inc. v. Brilliant Tube Sign Co.

Good Law
48 F.2d 176·8 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 512·1931 U.S. App. LEXIS 4203
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 23, 1931No. 6221California1,491 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Rudkin, J.

This was a suit for infringement of letters patent No. 1,125,476, dated January 19, 1915, covering improvements in a system of illuminating by luminescent tubes. The plaintiff is the owner and holder of the exclusive right and license to manufacture, use, and sell the patented device,-or devices, in certain western states, including the state of Washington. A later patent set forth in the complaint is not involved on the present appeal. The court below found that the patent was invalid because the alleged invention was not useful, and because the description of the invention in the specifications was not in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art or science to which it appertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make, construct, and use the same. From the decree of dismissal this appeal was prosecuted.

In considering the validity of the patent, we have the presumption of validity which always attaches to a grant of this kind; we have marked commercial success, especially during recent years, and we have the rule of comity which is peculiarly applicable to cases of this kind. The validity of the patent was first…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.