Gillespie

This action for infringement of patent was brought by filing complaint. An answer was then filed containing general denials and an affirmative defense, which sets up several prior patents claimed to anticipate the device patented and to show that it lacked novelty, utility and invention, and a “counterclaim”, which is actually a claim for damages against plaintiffs as a result of conspiracy to use the letters patent in restraint of trade. An “Answer to Counter-claim” appears in the record, but the denials apparently do not refer to the paragraphs of the answer which embody the counterclaim. As to whether issues were created is questionable. There was also an affirmative defense to the “counterclaim” for failure to state sufficient facts, but again the application is doubtful. Defendant made a motion for summary judgment “dismissing the complaint and for the relief demanded in defendant’s counterclaim” and, in the alternative, “for an order striking plaintiff’s complaint and dismissing the action with prejudice” for failure of plaintiff to answer interrogatories.

The judgment, after reciting that “there is no genuine issue of fact,” reads: “And the Court having made an order…