Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: patents Sorted by: old Year: 1972 Page 1 of about 485 results (0.011 seconds)

Jan 28 1972 (HC)

Prem Nath Mayer Vs. Registrar of Trade Marks and anr.

Court : Kolkata

Decided on : Jan-28-1972

Reported in : AIR1972Cal261,76CWN459

..... the words 'fruit salt', which were descriptive only, and not deceptive, yet under the circumstances they were calculated to deceive the public within the meaning of section 73 of the patents, designs and trade marks act, 1883, and that the trade mark ought not to be registered. the court of appeal reversed the decision of kay j., on the ground that .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 11 1972 (HC)

Hari Kam Dhupar Vs. Rajinder Singh and anr.

Court : Delhi

Decided on : Feb-11-1972

Reported in : AIR1973Delhi145; 9(1973)DLT142

..... policy of the statute.' lord herschell, with whom lord morris concurred, observed : 'the act does not provide that if this requirement is not complied with the patent shall be void, and i think, it is impossible to imply any such condition'. in jackson (francis) developments ltd v. 'hall*, the argument was that if the tenant failed to ..... one of form only, and i think the legislature did not intend to make the direction, which undoubtedly the act contains, a condition upon the non-compliance with which the patent should be void. there is.no trace of any such intention in the statute, and there does not seem any good reason why it should be inferred from the general ..... and conditions set out in the form was made. a literal compliance with the form was not essential. in vickers sons and co. v. siddell, section 5(1) of the patents designs and trade marks act, 1883 required that an application must be made in a form prescribed in the schedule. nevertheless lord halsbury i. c., held that- 'the objection that .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 22 1972 (HC)

Pendela Narasimham and anr. Vs. Pendela Venkata Narasimham and ors.

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Mar-22-1972

Reported in : AIR1973AP162

..... cases do not help the respondents.21. we, therefore, overrule the preliminary objection and held that defendants 1 and 2 are competent to file this letters patents appeals, and this appeal is entertainable.22. we will next take up the contention of appellants' counsel on merits. the learned counsel contended that a ..... was reversed by the appellate court, any of the parties to the appeal, under order xli, rule 4 of the civil procedure code, could file a letters patent appeal against the appellate court's decree.14. if a debt contracted by a 'karta' of a joint family is not for a legal necessity ..... no. 4 alone had filed an appeal to this court against the whole decree, and defendants 1 and 2, the appellants in this letters patent appeal, were also party-respondents in the appeal before our learned brother. the learned single judge reversed the finding of the trial court and held ..... exonerated defendant no. 4 from his liability. to pay the detb.7. the correctness of the judgment of our learned brother is challenged in this letters patent appeal before us, by defendants 1 and 2.8. the counsel for the respondents- plaintiffs raised a preliminary objection that the appeal is not maintainable, ..... from the liability under the mortgage and substituted plaint b schedule property as security for a schedule property.2. the material facts leading to this letters patent appeal may briefly be stated; defendant no. 1 is the father of defendants 2 and 3 and 'karta' of the joint family comprising of himself .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 29 1972 (FN)

United States Vs. Topco Assocs., Inc.

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Mar-29-1972

..... the court, united states v. national lead co., 332 u. s. 319 (1947), involved a world-wide arrangement [ footnote 2/4 ] for dividing territories, page 405 u. s. 617 pooling patents, and exchanging technological information. the arrangement was found illegal by the district court without any reliance on a per se rule; [ footnote 2/5 ] this court, in affirming, was concerned .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 29 1972 (FN)

Ford Motor Co. Vs. United States

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Mar-29-1972

..... gave up in 1964. although it owned some 800 accessory stores and successfully wholesaled other items to more than 50,000 shops and filling stations, it could not surmount the patent discrimination against brands not blessed with detroit's approbation. goodyear tire and rubber company quit in only three years. globe union, a fabricator which had barely 1% of the nation ..... not be construed to limit the use of this right. even on that assumption, we could not accept the conclusion advanced by ford. even constitutionally protected property rights such as patents may not be used as levers for obtaining objectives proscribed by the antitrust laws. e.g., besser mfg. co. v. united states, 343 u. s. 444 , 343 u. s. 448 .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 07 1972 (HC)

K.P. Devassay Vs. Anthony

Court : Kerala

Decided on : Apr-07-1972

Reported in : AIR1973Ker24

..... has to be given its ordinary meaning. in skinner & co. v. shew & co., (1893) 1 ch 413 in dealing with the expression 'or otherwise' occurring in section 32 of the patents designs and trade marks act, the material portion of which read:'where any person claiming to be the patentee of any invention, by circulars, advertisements or otherwise threatens any other .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 24 1972 (FN)

S and E Contractors, Inc. Vs. United States

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Apr-24-1972

..... event, demonstrates that the act means exactly what it says. page 406 u. s. 59 two significant considerations buttress my conclusion that the court's construction of the act is patently and grievously erroneous. first. the bill that became the wunderlich act was a government bill. as the committee report said, the act, with a minor exception, "is exactly the same ..... from it," hazel-atlas co. v. hartford co., 322 u. s. 238 , 322 u. s. 245 , are the usual forms of relief which have been granted. patents obtained with unclean hands and contracts that are based on those patents are similarly tainted, and will not be enforced. precision co. v. automotive co., 324 u. s. 806 . contracts with the united states -- like ..... patents -- are matters concerning far more than the interest of the adverse parties; they entail the public interest: "[w]here a suit in equity concerns the public interest as well as .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 22 1972 (FN)

CaplIn Vs. Marine Midland Grace Trust Co.

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : May-22-1972

..... the filing of the petition initiating a proceeding under this title . . . to all of the following kinds of property wherever located (1) documents relating to his property; (2) interests in patents, patent rights, copyrights, and trade-marks, and in applications therefor . . . (3) powers which he might have exercised for his own benefit, but not those which he might have exercised solely for .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 26 1972 (HC)

In the Matter of Willcox Buckwell India Ltd. Vs. Union of India

Court : Delhi

Decided on : May-26-1972

Reported in : ILR1972Delhi598

..... or person carrying on any business within the objects of this company. (2) lands, buildings, easements or other interests in real estate. (3) plant, machinery, personal estate and effects. (4) patents, patent rights or inventions, copy-rights, design, trade marks or secret processes and agencies, prospecting or other licenses, concessions and grants and to work the same'.(4) company appn. no. 58 .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 30 1972 (FN)

Deepsouth Packing Co., Inc. Vs. Laitram Corp.

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : May-30-1972

..... the injunction it seeks, laitram must show a 271(a) direct infringement by deepsouth in the united states, that is, that deepsouth "makes," "uses," or "sells" the patented product within the bounds of this country. laitram does not suggest that deepsouth "uses" the machines. its argument that deepsouth sells the machine -- based primarily on deepsouth's sales ..... the fifth circuit panel's opinion, those courts that previously considered the question "worked themselves into . . . a conceptual box" by adopting "an artificial, technical construction" of the patent laws, a construction, moreover, which, in the opinion of the panel, "[subverted] the constitutional scheme of promoting the progress of science and useful arts'" by allowing an intrusion on ..... member in the tumbler were hardly novel: laitram concedes that the inventors merely adapted punched metal sheets ordered from a commercial catalog in order to perfect their invention. the patents were warranted not by the novelty of their elements, but by the novelty of the combination they represented. invention was recognized because laitram's assignors [ footnote 3 ] ..... even in those piscatorially favored federal courts blissfully situated on the nation's gulf coast, but they are properly recited in this case. petitioner and respondent both hold patents on machines that devein shrimp more cheaply and efficiently than competing machinery or hand labor can do the job. extensive litigation below has established that respondent, the laitram .....

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //