Skip to content

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

Nov 03 1972 (HC)

Prina Chemical Works and ors. Vs. Sukhdayal and ors.

Court : Delhi

Decided on : Nov-03-1972

Reported in : ILR1974Delhi545

..... evidence. if this is so, the plaintiffs cannot complain of any invasion of their right as they have no right in property. in theory a technical trade mark like a patent right is a species of property and when it is invaded or appropriated, the owner thereof is not only entitled to protection from further trespass, but to the recovery of ..... is much wider in character. passing off is a form of unfair competition. remedy against unfair compeition is afforded by special statutes. various forms of industrial property registered trade marks, patents, copyrights, designs and the like have been very strongly protected by the legislature. similarly, an unregistered mark or name or a trade are also protected.(32) it is well established ..... f. a. marlow) (9) jenkins l. j. at page 397 observed.-'weemphasise that his appeal is concerned solely with passing off and not with the infringement of trade mark of patent rights. it is, of course, essential to the success of any claim in respect of passing off based on the use of a given mark or get up that the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 18 1972 (HC)

Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. E.C. Jacob

Court : Kerala

Decided on : Jul-18-1972

Reported in : [1973]89ITR88(Ker)

..... that capital gains are assessable in the case of transfer of goodwill, the indian act did not have in contemplation, when enacting section 12b, that self-created assets like copyright, patents and goodwill should be subjected to capital gains arising on their transfer. it is enough to say that, complex and difficult as this question is, we are not satisfied that .....

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!

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!

Nov 20 1972 (FN)

Gottschalk Vs. Benson

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Nov-20-1972

..... a "process" for expanding metal. a process "involving mechanical operations, and producing a new and useful result," id. at 214 u. s. 385 -386, was held to be a patentable process, process patents not being limited to chemical action. smith v. snow, 294 u. s. 1 , and taxham v. smith, 294 u. s. 20 , involved a process for setting eggs in ..... u.s.c. 101 provides: "whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title." [ footnote 3 ] see r. benrey, understanding digital computers 4 (1964). [ footnote 4 ] "to promote the progress of . . . useful arts ..... search files. even if these were available, reliable searches would not be feasible or economic because of the tremendous volume of prior art being generated. without this search, the patenting of programs would be tantamount to mere registration, and the presumption of validity would be all but nonexistent." "it is noted that the creation of programs has undergone substantial ..... or physical acts, such as temperature control, changes articles or materials. the chemical process or the physical acts which transform the raw material are, however, sufficiently definite to confine the patent monopoly within rather definite bounds. cochrane v. deener, 94 u. s. 780 , involved a process for manufacturing flour so as to improve its quality. the process first separated the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 26 1972 (HC)

Ampro Food Products Vs. Ashoka Biscuit Works and ors.

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Sep-26-1972

Reported in : AIR1973AP17

..... did not exclude such a defence. the absence of an express provision, such as the one contained in section 29 (2) in regard to a patent, in the case of a design, it, in my view, a ground for coming to the conclusion that such a defence is precluded in a suit based on the infringement ..... registered design was a new or original design. when the learned judge's attention was drawn to the fact that the case of patents it was expressly provided by section 29(2) of the patents and designs act, 1911 that every ground on which a patent might be revoked shall be available by way of defence to a suit for infringement of a ..... patent and that there was no similar provision in the case of a design the learned judge observed that the absence of a similar provision in the case of a design .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 27 1972 (HC)

Orissa Textile Mills Ltd. and anr. Vs. Chintamani Sahu and Brothers an ...

Court : Orissa

Decided on : Sep-27-1972

Reported in : [1975]45CompCas76(Orissa)

..... appeal, therefore, stands overruled. our conclusion is that the impugned order is a ' judgment ' and an appeal under clause 10 of the letters patent of the patna high court read with clause 4 of the orissa high court order is maintainable before a division bench of this court.29. under ..... four tests have been formulated to decide whether an order of a single judge amounted to a ' judgment ' under the particular clause of the letters patent. they are :(1) whether the order or judgment of the single judge terminates the suit or proceedings ? (2) whether it affects the merits of ..... represent the consensus of judicial opinion.14. on three occasions, their lordships of the supreme court came to deal with the term ' judgment ' appearing in different letters patents. the first is in the case of asrumati debi v. rupendra deb : [1953]4scr1159 . dr. mookerjee j. (as his lordship then was), delivering the ..... gangadhar sitaram air 1943 nag 282) have equated the term 'judgment' appearing in the letters patent with a decree as understood under the code of civil procedure. there are others who have gone to the extent of saying that :' a decision can ..... of account. '12. a cursory analysis of judicial opinion in this country on the meaning of the term ' judgment' with reference to the letters patent shows it to be sharply divided. some high courts like rangoon (dayabhai jiwandas v. murugappa chettyar air 1935 rang 267 and nagpur (ganpatrao pande v. .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 20 1972 (FN)

United States Vs. Jim

Court : US Supreme Court

Decided on : Nov-20-1972

..... certain time and work conditions are met. 43 u.s.c. 161-165. yet, during this period, he has the right to exclusive possession and use, unless the patent was secured by fraud. patents page 409 u. s. 90 are not issued in oil and gas exploration, but leases are. 30 u.s.c. 226. but that fact does not affect the ..... with the lease, the statute, and regulations. 30 u.s.c. 188. pan american petroleum corp. v. pierson, 284 f.2d 649. until lands are patented, title remains in the united states. yet even before a patent issues, the claims are "valid against the united states if there has been a discovery of mineral within the limits of the claim, if the ..... remains in congress after the express purpose of the act "permanently [to] withdraw" the lands from disposal? public lands are usually subject to disposition by patent, and, upon its issuance, control over the transaction ceases and the patent can only be set aside by judicial proceedings in the courts. michigan land & lumber co. v. rust, 168 u. s. 589 ; moore v. robbins .....

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!

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!

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