THIERRYV.RIEKMANN

1895 Reports of Patent Design and Trade Mark Cases  
Invention.-Alleged anticipation.c-Fuaictions of Court of Appeal when invention is found by Court below. This teas an action for infrinqement of a patent for an eyelet for bouts, &lc., made of metal, and coated both above and below the flanqe urith. celluloid so as to 10 provide a permanent facing for the eyelet, iohicli might be of any desired colour. The Defendant denied infringement, and alleged that the Plaintiffs' invention ioas anticipated, or that, having regard to the state of knowledge
more » ... state of knowledge at the time of the patent, there ioas no subject-matter in the Plai-ntiffs' combination. lnfringement was admitted at the trial. In the anticipations relied on by the Defendant, 15 lacing-hooks were shown coated with celluloid, and also an eyelet coated on one side , but no sucb eyelet as the Plaintiffs' had been produced on the market. There toas, however, a demand for an eyelet which uiould stand uiear, The Plaintiff» experimented for six years before arriuinq at their invention. Held, at the trial, that the Plaintiffs' combination uias n-ew; that it ioas 20 admittedly useful, which afforded a presumption. of novelty and i1~genu~ty; that, to constitute anticipation, the essential part of the invention must befound in the anticipation; and that the anticipations did not shoio, or lead to, the particular combination of the Plaintiffs. The Defendant appealed. 25 Held, on appeal, that the decision of the Court beloui ought to be upheld, and the appeal ioas dismissed.
doi:10.1093/rpc/12.30.543 fatcat:246my3pb7rdgxj5obfg3s4c2gq