Page images
PDF
EPUB
[merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small]

Let nothing be done in reference to the above-mentioned patent without due notice to

[merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][ocr errors][merged small]

Patent held invalid in a court of law.

Patent revoked.

Want of novelty.

Want of utility.

Denial of merit.

Title of petitioner.

38.-NOTICE OF OBJECTIONS TO EXTENSION OF TERM.

In the Privy Council.

[ocr errors]

In the matter of letters patent granted to of bearing date the

day of 18 and numbered

[ocr errors]

In the matter of the petition of term of the said letters patent.

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors][merged small]

for an extension of the

Notice is hereby given of the several grounds of the objection of to the granting of the prayer of the said petition, that is to say:

1. The said letters patent are null and void, and a verdict was given against the validity of the said letters patent in a certain cause in the Court of wherein the petitioner was

plaintiff and defendant.

2. The said letters patent were repealed by the judgment of the Court of in a petition for revocation presented

by

[ocr errors]

3. The alleged invention was not new at the date of the said letters patent.

4. The alleged invention is of no use to the public, or not of so much public utility as to be a sufficient consideration for any prolongation of the term granted by the said letters patent.

5. The said petitioner does not possess sufficient merit to entitle him to a prolongation of the term granted by the said letters patent.

6. The said petitioner is not entitled to (the whole of) the

privilege granted by the said letters patent (by assignment or otherwise).

7. The petitioner has been sufficiently remunerated and Remuneration. rewarded for all his expenses, labour, and ingenuity respecting

the said invention.

8. If the petitioner has failed to obtain a sufficient amount Negligence of of remuneration or reward he has only failed to do so in conse- petitioner. quence of his own gross negligence.

9. The petitioner has permitted infringements of the said Negligence in letters patent, and has not taken any proceedings to restrain restraining infringements. such infringements.

10. The specification of the said letters patent does not Insufficiency of sufficiently describe the nature of the invention or the manner specification. in which the same is to be performed.

11. The allegations contained in the said petition are not Denial of true in substance or in fact.

[merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors]

statements in petition.

Solicitor for

39. ADVERTISEMENT OF DAY APPOINTED FOR HEARING

PETITION.

(Title as above.)

day

Notice is hereby given that their lordships, the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council, have appointed the of , 18, at half-past ten o'clock in the forenoon, for hearing the matter of the above petition.

Solicitor for the plaintiff.

[merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors]

To the Queen's most excellent Majesty in Council.
In the matter of letters patent granted to

[merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][ocr errors]

formerly of

dated the

Invention.

Grant,

Specification.

Advertisements.

[merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small]

, formerly of

1. That your petitioner, previously to the grant of the letters patent hereinafter mentioned, invented, after considerable personal application and cost, "A new or improved constructed as a (hereinafter called "the said invention"), which invention was and is of great utility, and greatly beneficial to the public.

2. That your Majesty was graciously pleased by letters patent under the Great Seal of the United Kingdom of Great Britain bearing date the day of 18, to grant unto your petitioner, his executors, administrators, and assigns, the sole privilege and authority to use the said invention within the said United Kingdom, the Channel Islands, and Isle of Man, for the term of fourteen years from the date of the said letters patent.

3. That your petitioner, in compliance with a proviso in the said letters patent contained, duly made and caused to be filed in the Patent Office within nine calendar months from the date of the said letters patent, an instrument in writing under his hand and seal, particularly describing and ascertaining the nature of his said invention, and the manner in which the same was to be performed.

(Here must be set out in detail all the facts of the case upon the lines indicated in the chapter upon Petition for Extension.) That your petitioner humbly submits that under the circumstances of the case an exclusive right of using and vending the said invention for the further period of seven years will not sufficiently reimburse and remunerate your petitioner.

That your petitioner has given public notice by advertisements caused to be inserted the requisite number of times in

the London Gazette, and in other newspapers, pursuant to the statutes in that case made and provided, that it is his intention to apply to your Majesty in Council that the said letters patent may be extended for a further term.

Your petitioner therefore humbly prays that your Majesty will be graciously pleased to take the case of your petitioner into your Royal consideration, and to refer this petition to the Judicial Committee of your Majesty's most honourable Privy Council; and that your petitioner may be heard before such committee by his counsel and witnesses, and that your Majesty will be graciously pleased to grant to your petitioner a prolongation of the term by the said letters patent granted for the additional term of fourteen years or for such other term as to your Majesty shall seem fit.

And your petitioner will ever pray.

504

Title.

Provisional

specification.

APPENDIX E.

EXAMPLES OF SPECIFICATIONS AND

CLAIMS.

PROVISIONAL AND COMPLETE SPECIFICATION TO
A PATENT FOR A NEW MECHANICAL APPLI-
ANCE AND MODE OF OPERATING-A VERY
GENERAL CLAIM. 1885. No. 6205.

NOTE. These were the specifications contested in Siddell v.
Vickers, L. R. 39 Ch. D. 92, decision of Kekewich, J.,
affirmed by the Court of Appeal, Cotton, Fry and Lopes,
L.JJ., and the House of Lords, L. R. 15 App. Cas. 496,
holding that the provisional specification was sufficient and
that the claim was sufficient having regard to the body of the
complete specification and to the particular subject-matter of
the invention. Two sheets of drawings which accompany the
specification are not given here (i).

PROVISIONAL SPECIFICATION. AN IMPROVED MECHANICAL APPLIANCE FOR WORKING OR OPERATING ON LARGE FORGINGS IN IRON OR STEEL.-This Invention relates to the construction and application of an improved and more simple and effective mechanical appliance or means, for working or operating on large forgings in iron or steel, being such forgings as are usually made under a hydraulic forging press or machine.

My improved appliance consists of a horizontal bar or bars made of suitable metal and fitted with suitable pulleys and hooks, which bar or bars can be placed or fitted on either side of the crosshead of the forging press, or through the "pellet " or key way.

Clips or grips or ratchets are conveniently arranged so as to fix on or hold the ingot or forging and hooked on the ratchet or clip or grip; and in operating, when the press lifts up or

(i) It would not be wise to treat this as a model in preparing specifications, it is given here as showing

probably the extreme limits to which the courts will go in supporting a patent.

« PreviousContinue »