EB: ANDERSON'S BLACK ROCK, INC. v. PAVEMENT CO., 396 U.S. 57 (1969)
From Bill Goodwine's Wiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
Situation
- Pavement Co accuses Anderson's Black Rock for infringement of its patent for a "means for treating bituminous pavement"
- Bituinous concrete=asphalt, blacktop
- The patent in question sought to solve the problem of cold joint (poor bonding between strips)
- Radient-heat burner for heating exposed edge of cold strip of pavement
- spreader for placing bituminous material against the strip
- a tamper and creed for shaping the newly placed material
Accusation
- Anderson's placed a radient-heat burner on the front of a standard paving machine - allowing it to perform same basic functions described in Pavement Co's patent
Decision
- U.S. Supreme Court: The patent is invalid (this reverses an Appeals Court ruling)
Reasoning
- Each of the elements combined in the patent were known to the prior art (heater itself was nothing special)- this combination was obvious to someone skilled in the art
- The combination may be of "great convenience," but it does not perform a "new or different function"
- Court also cites Graham v. John Deere in that Congress cannot "enlarge the patent monopoly without regard to the innovation, advancement, or social benefit gained thereby"
