 The claim is a statutory requirement, prescribed for the very purpose of making the patentee define precisely what his invention is; and it is unjust to the public, as well as an evasion of the law, to construe it in a manner different from the plain...  The Central Law Journal - Strana 2791910Úplné zobrazení - Podrobnosti o knize
 | United States. Court of Claims - 1940 - 772 str.
...point out the parts which he claims to be new, and in White v. Dunbar, 119 US 47, 52. the court said : "The claim is a statutory requirement, prescribed...manner different from the plain import of its terms." The claim of the patent in suit, even if valid, is specific in scope and very limited. There is no... | |
 | United States. Court of Claims, Audrey Bernhardt - 1955 - 936 str.
...purpose of making the patentee define precisely what his invention is ; and it is unjust to the puolic, as well as an evasion of the law, to construe it in...manner different from the plain import of its terms. [Italics supplied.] As this court stated in Kuhne Identification Systems, Inc. v. United States, 82... | |
 | United States. Patent Office - 1910 - 642 str.
...specification, so as to make it Include something more than, or something different from, what Its terms express. The context may, undoubtedly, be resorted...of its terms. This has been so often expressed in this Court that It is unnecessary to pursue the subject further. Appellants introduced several patents... | |
 | 1928 - 1130 str.
...Fort-ified Mfg. Co., 284 F. 315 (CCA 8). In White v. Dunbar, supra, the court in its opinion said: "The claim is a statutory requirement, prescribed...the opinions of this court that it is unnecessary to pursue the subject further." [3] It is true that the patent is entitled to a range qf equivalents.... | |
 | 1887 - 1910 str.
...claim is a statutory requirement, prescribed for the very purpose of making the patentee define exactly what his invention is; and it is unjust to the public,...the opinions of this court that it is unnecessary to pursue the subject further." In view, therefore, of the possible, if not necessary, limitation of the... | |
 | 1895 - 2084 str.
...G Sup. Ct. 840; White v. Dunbar, 119 US 47, 52, 7 «up. Ct. 72. As was said in the last-cited case: "The claim is a statutory requirement prescribed for...manner different from the plain import of its terms." The claims here, we think, were purposely framed broadly, so as to cover the simplest form of the alleged... | |
 | 1894 - 2074 str.
...patentee define precisely what his invention is; and It is unjust to the public, as well as evasion of law, to construe it in a manner different from the plain import of Us terms." This we accept as the correct law by which we must be governed, and we consider that, if... | |
 | 1904 - 1038 str.
...what his invention is, and it is unjust to the public, as well as an evasion of the law, to construct it in a manner different from the plain import of its terms." White v. Dunbar, 119 US 4Г-52, 7 Sup. Ct. 72, 30 L. Ed. 303. For still another reason the fifth claim... | |
 | United States. Supreme Court - 1887 - 1244 str.
...for the purpose of changing it and making it different from what it is. The claim is a statutory 1511 requirement, prescribed for the very purpose of making...the opinions of this court that it is unnecessary to pursue the subject further. See Keystone Bridge Co. v. Phcmix Iron Co. 95 US 274, 278 [Bk. 24, L. ed.... | |
 | 1887 - 1458 str.
...meaning of the claim ; but not for the pur* poet- of changing it, and making it different from what*it is. The claim is a statutory requirement, prescribed...of its terms. This has been so often expressed in theopinions of this court that it is unnecessary to pursue the subject further. See Keystone Bridge... | |
| |
