Rubens

Rubens v. Bowers

Good Law
136 F.2d 887·58 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 290·1943 U.S. App. LEXIS 3158
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJune 29, 1943No. 10267California2,072 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Stephens, J.

Certain defendants below, Frank S. Rubens and Electro Ultra-violet Corporation (hereinafter called Electro), appeal from a judgment of the District Court decreeing ■that they and Therapy Products Co. of America (hereinafter called Therapy) had infringed upon certain letters patent, and ordering that an injunction issue and that plaintiffs recover profits and damages from the named defendants. Therapy, having been adjudicated bankrupt prior to the filing of the Notice of Appeal, is not named as an appellant herein.

An application for a patent on a therapeutic light ray apparatus was made by its co-inventors Bristow and Strong on April 8, 1930. Before the patent issued Bristow and Strong, on January 11, 1932, assigned all their right, title and interest in the invention, application and anticipated letters patent to Radiant Holding Corporation, Ltd. (hereinafter called Radiant), a Nevada corporation. On December 4, 1932, Radiant granted Rubens, as trustee, an exclusive license to manufacture and sell equipment containing the new apparatus. The agreement included a provision for its termination by Radiant, by means of a written notice to Rubens, upon the latter’s failure to account…

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.