Page images
PDF
EPUB

operation of the assignment in the assignee. So held when the assignment had been recorded before the patent issued. (Ib.) An assignment of an invention. is not void by being executed before the invention is patented. It is a good transfer of the right of the patentee immediately upon his obtaining the patent, and he would be estopped from setting up any adverse title. (Herbert v. Adams, 4 Mason, 15.) An inventor may sell his invention before he obtains a patent; and after the patent has been obtained, the contract will secure to the assignee the extent of his right. The provision of law which requires the application for a patent to be made in the name of the inventor becomes necessarily a part of the contract; the inventor sells his right, and obligates himself to obtain a patent. (Rathbone v. Orr, 5 McLean, 131; and see Rich v. Lippincott, 26 Jour. Frank. Inst., 3d s., 13.) An inventor may sell future improvements as well as those already made, and a second as well as a first patent for them. (Nesmith v. Calvert, 1 Wood. & Minot, 34.) It is not proper to grant a patent on a joint invention to one of two inventors. upon the assignment of the other; but all who are concerned in the invention should join in the petition. (2 Opinions Attorneys General, 571.) Patents for inventions cannot, under § 6 of the act of 1837, issue jointly to the inventor as such and to the assignee of a partial interest, but may issue to the assignee or assignees of the whole interest. (4 Ib., 401.) When a transfer or assignment of an inventor's right is only partial, although the part excepted be very small, the assignee has no legal claim to have the patent issue in his name. It should issue in the name of the inventor. (9 Ib., 403.)

11. EFFECT OF ASSIGNMENT.-An assignment of an exclusive right to make, use, and vend to others a patented machine, within a certain territory only, does not prohibit the assignee from selling elsewhere, out of the said territory, the products of such machines. The restriction in the assignment applies solely to the using of the machine, and is no restriction as to place of the sale of the product. (Simpson v. Wilson, 4 How., 709.) An agreement between a patentee and a third person, as trustee, that the latter should hold the patent and have the control thereof for the benefit of those who had a right to use the same, under contracts with the patentee, transfers the entire interest and ownership, legal and equitable, of the patentee in the patent to such trustee, for the benefit of those interested. (Hartshorn v. Day, 19 How., 211.) An assignment of the revenues of a railroad, by the company, to a preferred creditor, and the use of the rolling stock, is not a transfer of corporate entity or property; and the use, by the assignee, of cars to which patented brakes were attached, does not render him liable to account for infringement upon the patent right, the exclusive use of the brakes having previously been licensed to the company by the patentee. The assignee used the brakes as an agent and not as a purchaser; such use, in the name of the company, being exclusive, in the meaning of the license. (Emigh v. Chamberlain, 1 Am. Law. Reg., n. s., 207; S. C., 2 Fish., 192.) A particular agreement allowing the use of a patent right held a mere license, and not an assignment conveying an interest in the patent. (Armstrong v. Hanlenbeck, 3 N. Y. Leg. Obs., 43.) An assignment of the whole or any part of an interest in a patent will be valid, although it is

at the time the subject of litigation, (Gay v. Cornell, 1 Blatchf., 510,) but a paper purporting to be the assignment of an expired patent is void as an assignment. (Bell v. McCullough, 1 Fish., 380.)

Mere circumstantial differences between a description of the patent in the specification and in an assignment will not render the assignment invalid, (Holden v. Curtis, 2 N. Hamp., 63,) nor do they indicate fraud or prevent the right from passing. (Case v. Mowry, 1 N. Hamp., 349.) An assignment may be exclusive, although limited to a certain number of machines, (Washburn v. Gould, 3 Story, 131;) such limitation is not inconsistent with the grant of an exclusive territorial right. (lb., 167.) The term exclusive comprehends not only an exclusive right to a whole patent, but the exclusive right to a patent in a particular section of country. (Ib., 131.) If an assignment contains no warranty, the vendee cannot set up a parol warranty, for it is presumed that the writing contains the entire contract, (Jolliffe v. Collins, 21 Mo., 341,) unless it is also alleged that the warranty was false and fraudulent, and then parol proof is only evidence of such representation. (McClure v. Jeffrey, 8 Ind., 83.) The conveyance of a patent by A, with the written consent of B, in whom the title then was, is equally effective with a conveyance directly from B. (Sherman v. Champlain Transportation Company, 31 Vt., 175.)

12. SALE ON EXECUTION.-A patented machine, and the right of use attached to it, may pass by sale, devise, or levy of execution, or assignment of any insolvent's effects. (Woodworth v. Curtis, 2 Wood. & Minot, 524.) The sale of a patented machine by a sheriff, under an execution, does not, in and of itself, convey to the purchaser

any right to use the machine in the manner pointed out in the patent right. The purchaser acts at his own peril. (Sawin v. Guild, 1 Gall., 485.)

13. ASSIGNEES OF ALIEN INVENTORS take and hold the patent, which may be issued to them with all the privileges belonging to American patentees. The clause in § 15 of the act of 1836, (5 Stats. at Large, 123,) requiring the invention to be put on sale in a certain time, applies only to alien patentees. (Tatham v. Lowber, 2 Blatchf., 49.) To the contrary, (Tatham v. Loring, 5 N. Y. Leg. Obs., 207.)

14. FORM OF ASSIGNMENT OF THE ENTIRE INTEREST IN AN INVENTION BEFORE THE ISSUE OF LETTERS PATENT.

In consideration of $1, to me paid by Ephraim G. Hall, of Cleveland, Ohio, I do hereby sell and assign to said Ephraim G. Hall all my right, title, and interest in and to a certain invention in plows, as fully set forth and described in the specification which I have prepared [if the application has been already made, say "and filed"] preparatory to obtaining letters patent of the United States therefor. And I do hereby authorize and request the Commissioner of Patents to issue the said letters patent to the said Ephraim G. Hall, as my assignee, for the sole use and behoof of the said Ephraim G. Hall and his legal representatives.

Witness my hand this sixteenth day of February, 1868. [5-cent revenue stamp.]

J. F. CROSSETTE.

15. FORM OF ASSIGNMENT OF THE ENTIRE INTEREST IN LETTERS PATENT.

In consideration of $500, to me paid by Nathan Wilcox, of Keokuk, Iowa, I do hereby sell and assign to the said Nathan Wilcox all my right, title, and interest in and to the letters patent of the United States, No. 41,806, for an improvement in locomotive head-lights, granted to me July 30, 1864, the same to be held and enjoyed by the said Nathan Wilcox to the full end of the term for which said letters are granted, as fully and entirely as the same would have been held and enjoyed by me if this assignment and sale had not been made.

Witness my hand this tenth day of June, 1869. [5-cent revenue stamp.]

HORACE KIMBALL.

16. FORM OF ASSIGNMENT OF AN UNDIVIDED INTEREST IN THE LETTERS PATENT AND EXTENSION THEREOF.

In consideration of $1,000, to me paid by Obadiah N. Bush, of Chicago, Illinois, I do hereby sell and assign to the said Obadiah N. Bush one undivided fourth part of all my right, title, and interest in and to the letters patent of the United States, No. 10,485, for an improvement in cookingstoves, granted to me May 16, 1856; the same to be held and enjoyed by the said Obadiah N. Bush to the full end of the term for which said letters patent are granted, and for the term of any extension thereof, as fully and entirely as the same would have been held and enjoyed by me if this assignment and sale had not been made.

Witness my hand this seventh day of January, 1869.

[5-cent revenue stamp.]

JOHN C. MORRIS.

17. FORM OF ASSIGNMENT OF EXCLUSIVE TERRITORIAL GRANT BY AN ASSIGNEE.—

In consideration of $1,000, to me paid by William H. Dinsmore, of Concord, New Hampshire, I do hereby grant and convey to the said William H. Dinsmore the exclusive right to make, use, and vend within the State of Wisconsin and the counties of Cook and Lake, in the State of Illinois, and in no other place or places, the improvement in corn planters for which letters patent of the United States, dated August 15, 1867, were granted to Leverett R. Hull, and by said Hull assigned to me December 3, 1867, by an assignment duly recorded in liber X8, p. 416, of the records of the Patent Office, the same to be held and enjoyed by the said William H. Dinsmore as fully and entirely as the same would have been held and enjoyed by me if this grant had not been made.

Witness my hand this nineteenth day of March, 1868.

[blocks in formation]

18. LICENSES NEED NOT BE RECORDED.-The patentee

« PreviousContinue »