Hotchkiss v. Greenwood (Fernando Rodriguez)

From Bill Goodwine's Wiki
Revision as of 18:40, 25 January 2011 by Fernando Rodriguez (talk | contribs) (Created page with "==Background== U.S. Supreme Court Hotchkiss v. Greenwood, 52 U.S. 11 How. 248 248 (1850) <bn> Hotchkiss v. Greenwood 52 U.S. (11 How.) 248 A patent granted for a "new and usef...")
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigationJump to search

Background

U.S. Supreme Court Hotchkiss v. Greenwood, 52 U.S. 11 How. 248 248 (1850) <bn>

Hotchkiss v. Greenwood

52 U.S. (11 How.) 248 A patent granted for a "new and useful improvement in making door and other knobs of all kinds of clay used in pottery, and of porcelain" by having the

   "cavity in which the screw or shank is inserted by which they are fastened largest at the bottom of its depth, in form of a dovetail, and a screw formed therein by pouring in metal in a fused state" 

Main Issue

The pattent was invalid. <bn>

 The test was that if no more ingenuity and skill was necessary to construct the new knob than was possessed by an ordinary mechanic acquainted with the business, the patent was void, and this was a proper question for the jury. 

Timeline

  1. The patent was granted, for manufacturing process in order to make the mold. Inventors stated that it was their novel idea.
  2. 1845 Greenwood brought to the Curcuit Court of the US in Ohio for stating that Hotchkiss and co. where not the original inventors of said process.
  • Making knobs in that way was common in several places long before the patent declaration, in the US.
  • The Hotchkiss and Co. also new that such knobs where made in the UK when they filed for patent.