McClintock

The appeal is upon an agreed statement on appeal pursuant to Equity Rule 77, 28 U.S.C.A. following section 723, in which it is stated that the principal questions on appeal are:

“1. Is the device described in plaintiff’s U. S. Patent No. 1,929,366 anticipated by the prior art?

“2. Do plaintiff’s Exhibits T-l and T — 2 infringe patent in suit?

“3. If (1) above is answered in the negative, and (2) above in the affirmative, is defendant H. E. Pearson guilty of infringement ?”

On July 1, 1935, appellant filed a bill of complaint alleging ownership of letters patent No. 1,929,366 and infringement of the same by appellees. In their answer, filed August 5, 1935, appellees allege that in view of the prior art existing at the time of the alleged invention described in appellant’s patent, the patent did not disclose or show any invention and was invalid. Appellees also denied infringement of the patent. The defendant John P. Gleason admitted the manufacture and sale “of the alleged infringing devices” (Exhibits T-l and T-2).

The matter was heard before a special master, who found that the patent was invalid for want of invention. In regard to the defense of noninfringement the master…