314:
of this new property in the metal, the machinery or apparatus would be useless, and not the subject of a patent. It is in connection with this property and the embodiment and adaptation of it to practical use that the machinery is described and the arrangement claimed. The discovery of this new element or property led naturally to the apparatus by which a new and most useful result is produced. The apparatus was but incidental and subsidiary to the new and leading idea of the invention. And hence the patentees set forth as the leading feature of it, the discovery that lead in a solid state, but under heat and extreme pressure in a close vessel, will reunite after separation of its parts as completely as though it had never been separated. It required very little ingenuity, after the experiments in a close vessel, by which this new property of the metal was first developed, to construct the necessary machinery for the formation of the pipe. The apparatus essential to develop this property would at once suggest the material parts, especially in the state of the art at the time. Any skillful mechanic, with before him, would readily construct the requisite machinery.
233:
31:
319:
the specification." These inventors did not suppose that their invention was the arrangement of machinery. "They state distinctly that the leading feature of their discovery consisted of this new property of lead and some of its alloys -- this, they say, is the remarkable feature of their invention -- and the apparatus described is regarded by them as subordinate, and as important only as enabling them to give practical effect to this newly discovered property, by means of which they produce the new manufacture ."
211:
to provide sufficient heat and pressure to remelt the lead, in effect, invented a new use of an old machine. The claim was to the old or obvious apparatus (as an apparatus) "when used to form pipes of metal under heat and pressure in the manner set forth or in any other manner substantially the same." It was not lawful to patent the old apparatus again, however used, so that the patent amounted to an attempt to patent the principle. That made the patent invalid.
220:
machinery with slight adjustments, obtained a patent in which the specification stated that the inventors "do not claim any of the parts—the cylinder, core, die, or bridge, but that they claim the combination when used to form pipes of metal, under heat and pressure, in the way they have described." They assigned their rights to Tatham, who sued the defendants, Le Roy and Smith, in the
Circuit Court for the Southern District of New York for patent infringement.
689:
293:
289:, for the proposition that "Now I take it to be clear that a machine or apparatus or other mechanical contrivance, in order to give the party a claim to a patent therefor, must in itself be substantially new. If it is old and well known, and applied only to a new purpose, that does not make it patentable." The instruction was wrong, so the judgment had to be reversed.
271:
addition to those already known. Through the agency of machinery, a new steam power may be said to have been generated. But no one can appropriate this power exclusively to himself under the patent laws. The same may be said of electricity and of any other power in nature, which is alike open to all and may be applied to useful purposes by the use of machinery.
223:
The judge charged the jury: "That the originality did not consist in the novelty of the machinery, but in bringing a newly discovered principle into practical application by which a useful article of manufacture is produced, and wrought pipe made, as distinguished from cast pipe." The jury rendered a
318:
Nelson argued that the Court ought to "construe specifications benignly, and to look through mere forms of expression, often inartificially used, to the substance, and to maintain the right of the patentee to the thing really invented, if ascertainable upon a liberal consideration of the language of
281:
Contrary to the charge to the jury, whether the apparatus is novel does make a difference. Here, the inventors conceded that the apparatus was old and they did "not claim as our invention and improvement any of the parts of the above described machinery"; they claimed the old machinery "when used to
256:
We do not claim as our invention and improvement, any of the parts of the above-described machinery independently of its arrangement and combination above set forth. What we do claim as our invention and desire to secure is the combination of the following parts above described, to-wit, the core and
210:
The inventors had discovered the principle that hot, but congealed, lead under pressure would re-unite as an unbroken solid material, which permitted manufacture of a superior lead pipe. The apparatus to make lead pipe was old and obvious: the inventors, by making slight changes in the old machinery
313:
e see that the leading feature of the invention consists in the discovery of a new property in the article of lead and in the employment and adaptation of it, by means of the machinery described, to the production of a new article, wrought pipe, never before successfully made. Without the discovery
274:
In all such cases, the processes used to extract, modify, and concentrate natural agencies constitute the invention. The elements of the power exist; the invention is not in discovering them, but in applying them to useful objects. Whether the machinery used be novel or consist of a new combination
219:
John and
Charles Hanson, of Huddersfield, England, made the alleged invention in 1837. Having been the first to discover that heating lead under pressure would eliminate discontinuities, such as a seam in cast lead pipe, and that this effect could be achieved by making and using the old, well-known
265:
The Court said that it was reversible error for the trial judge to charge the jury that "it was not material whether the mere combinations of machinery referred to were similar to the combination used by the
Hansons, because the originality did not consist in the novelty of the machinery, but in
326:
here a person discovers a principle or property of nature, or where he conceives of a new application of a well known principle or property of nature and also of some mode of carrying it out into practice so as to produce or attain a new and useful effect or result, he is entitled to protection
270:
It is admitted that a principle is not patentable. A principle, in the abstract, is a fundamental truth; an original cause; a motive; these cannot be patented, as no one can claim in either of them an exclusive right. Nor can an exclusive right exist to a new power, should one be discovered in
331:
He argued further that if someone discovers a "law of nature or property of matter and applied it" to produce a beneficial new result, "he is entitled to be protected against all modes by which the same result is produced by an application of the same law of nature or property of matter."
529:
397:
207:
decision, that requires for a claim, comprising a "natural principle or a law of Nature" to have an additional "inventive concept", which limits the application of the principle to a particular use.
1080:
697:
204:
266:
bringing a newly discovered principle into practical application by which a useful article of manufacture is produced and wrought pipe made, as distinguished from cast pipe." Rather:
960:
925:
907:
902:
884:
879:
874:
869:
864:
859:
854:
849:
844:
839:
834:
829:
824:
819:
814:
809:
804:
799:
794:
789:
784:
779:
774:
769:
751:
746:
741:
736:
731:
726:
721:
521:
389:
72:
195:
holding that "a newly discovered principle" cannot be patented, and no one can claim in it an exclusive right. This case is considered sometimes as the earliest example of
1075:
1070:
275:
of parts known, the right of the inventor is secured against all who use the same mechanical power or one that shall be substantially the same.
1065:
1039:
969:
584:
945:
673:
35:
232:
950:
309:
argued that the principle was what the inventors contributed and the particular apparatus used was trivial and unimportant:
327:
against all other modes of carrying the same principle or property into practice for obtaining the same effect or result.
54:
Thomas Otis Le Roy and David Smith, Plaintiffs in Error v. Benjamin Tatham, Junior, George N. Tatham, and Henry B. Tatham
977:
192:
993:
1044:
713:
577:
196:
361:
653:
648:
150:
545:
1001:
678:
668:
525:
393:
345:
64:
917:
761:
570:
643:
628:
244:
delivered the opinion of the Court. Justice Nelson, joined by
Justices Wayne and Grier, dissented.
146:
134:
663:
224:
verdict against the defendants for $ 11,394. The defendants then appealed to the
Supreme Court.
688:
894:
613:
292:
122:
1009:
985:
658:
608:
106:
536:
401:
1059:
638:
633:
623:
306:
200:
138:
67:
1017:
618:
593:
259:
when used to form pipes of metal under heat and pressure in the manner set forth
241:
126:
114:
257:
bridge or guide piece, with the cylinder, the piston, the chamber and the die,
87:
562:
341:
83:
554:
291:
231:
180:
Curtis took no part in the consideration or decision of the case.
79:
566:
30:
252:
The Court emphasized the inventors' statement in the patent:
285:
The Court quoted
Justice Story, sitting on circuit, in
458:
2 Story Rep. 408. 2 F. Cas. 1142 (C.C.D. Mass. 1843).
203:. This controversy was finally rectified in the 2012
191:, 55 U.S. (14 How.) 156 (1852), is a decision of the
1081:
United States
Supreme Court cases of the Taney Court
1032:
959:
938:
916:
893:
760:
712:
705:
696:
601:
171:
163:
158:
95:
59:
49:
42:
23:
167:McLean, joined by Taney, Catron, Daniel, Campbell
282:form pipes of metal, under heat and pressure."
261:or in any other manner substantially the same."
578:
340:The citations in this article are written in
8:
709:
702:
585:
571:
563:
20:
43:Argued December 16, 17, 20, 21, 1852
532:) 156 (1852) is available from:
352:
1040:Eighth and Ninth Circuits Act of 1837
970:Charles River Bridge v. Warren Bridge
18:1853 United States Supreme Court case
7:
36:Supreme Court of the United States
14:
1076:United States Supreme Court cases
687:
431:33 U.S. at 172 (emphasis added).
29:
1071:1852 in United States case law
175:Nelson, joined by Wayne, Grier
1:
1066:United States patent case law
978:United States v. The Amistad
228:Ruling of the Supreme Court
193:United States Supreme Court
1097:
994:Cooley v. Board of Wardens
1045:Tenth Circuit Act of 1863
685:
197:patentable subject matter
179:
100:
28:
236:Justice John McLean 1849
45:Decided January 10, 1853
1002:Dred Scott v. Sandford
348:for more information.
344:style. Please see the
329:
316:
297:
279:
263:
237:
324:
311:
295:
268:
254:
235:
546:Library of Congress
467:See 55 U.S. at 177.
199:controversy in the
503:55 U.S. at 186-87.
449:55 U.S. at 176-77.
440:55 U.S. at 174-75.
413:55 U.S. at 156-57.
322:In Nelson's view:
298:
238:
151:Benjamin R. Curtis
111:Associate Justices
1053:
1052:
1028:
1027:
934:
933:
596:(1836–1864)
360:Resources, MPEP.
287:Bean v. Smallwood
184:
183:
1088:
1010:Ableman v. Booth
986:Luther v. Borden
946:Aboriginal title
710:
703:
691:
587:
580:
573:
564:
559:
553:
550:
544:
541:
535:
518:Le Roy v. Tatham
504:
501:
495:
492:
486:
483:
477:
474:
468:
465:
459:
456:
450:
447:
441:
438:
432:
429:
423:
420:
414:
411:
405:
386:Le Roy v. Tatham
383:
377:
376:
374:
372:
357:
248:Majority opinion
188:Le Roy v. Tatham
96:Court membership
33:
32:
24:Le Roy v. Tatham
21:
1096:
1095:
1091:
1090:
1089:
1087:
1086:
1085:
1056:
1055:
1054:
1049:
1024:
955:
930:
912:
889:
756:
692:
683:
597:
591:
557:
551:
548:
542:
539:
533:
513:
508:
507:
502:
498:
494:55 U.S. at 185.
493:
489:
485:55 U.S. at 181.
484:
480:
476:55 U.S. at 180.
475:
471:
466:
462:
457:
453:
448:
444:
439:
435:
430:
426:
422:55 U.S. at 157.
421:
417:
412:
408:
384:
380:
370:
368:
359:
358:
354:
338:
303:
250:
230:
217:
149:
147:Robert C. Grier
137:
135:Peter V. Daniel
125:
91:
44:
38:
19:
12:
11:
5:
1094:
1092:
1084:
1083:
1078:
1073:
1068:
1058:
1057:
1051:
1050:
1048:
1047:
1042:
1036:
1034:
1030:
1029:
1026:
1025:
1023:
1022:
1014:
1006:
998:
990:
982:
974:
965:
963:
957:
956:
954:
953:
948:
942:
940:
936:
935:
932:
931:
929:
928:
922:
920:
914:
913:
911:
910:
905:
899:
897:
891:
890:
888:
887:
882:
877:
872:
867:
862:
857:
852:
847:
842:
837:
832:
827:
822:
817:
812:
807:
802:
797:
792:
787:
782:
777:
772:
766:
764:
758:
757:
755:
754:
749:
744:
739:
734:
729:
724:
718:
716:
707:
700:
694:
693:
686:
684:
682:
681:
676:
671:
666:
661:
656:
651:
646:
641:
636:
631:
626:
621:
616:
611:
605:
603:
599:
598:
592:
590:
589:
582:
575:
567:
561:
560:
512:
511:External links
509:
506:
505:
496:
487:
478:
469:
460:
451:
442:
433:
424:
415:
406:
378:
351:
350:
337:
334:
302:
299:
296:Justice Nelson
249:
246:
229:
226:
216:
213:
182:
181:
177:
176:
173:
169:
168:
165:
161:
160:
156:
155:
154:
153:
123:James M. Wayne
112:
109:
107:Roger B. Taney
104:
98:
97:
93:
92:
77:
61:
57:
56:
51:
50:Full case name
47:
46:
40:
39:
34:
26:
25:
17:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1093:
1082:
1079:
1077:
1074:
1072:
1069:
1067:
1064:
1063:
1061:
1046:
1043:
1041:
1038:
1037:
1035:
1031:
1020:
1019:
1015:
1012:
1011:
1007:
1004:
1003:
999:
996:
995:
991:
988:
987:
983:
980:
979:
975:
972:
971:
967:
966:
964:
962:
958:
952:
949:
947:
944:
943:
941:
937:
927:
924:
923:
921:
919:
915:
909:
906:
904:
901:
900:
898:
896:
892:
886:
883:
881:
878:
876:
873:
871:
868:
866:
863:
861:
858:
856:
853:
851:
848:
846:
843:
841:
838:
836:
833:
831:
828:
826:
823:
821:
818:
816:
813:
811:
808:
806:
803:
801:
798:
796:
793:
791:
788:
786:
783:
781:
778:
776:
773:
771:
768:
767:
765:
763:
759:
753:
750:
748:
745:
743:
740:
738:
735:
733:
730:
728:
725:
723:
720:
719:
717:
715:
711:
708:
704:
701:
699:
695:
690:
680:
677:
675:
672:
670:
667:
665:
662:
660:
657:
655:
652:
650:
647:
645:
642:
640:
637:
635:
632:
630:
627:
625:
622:
620:
617:
615:
612:
610:
607:
606:
604:
600:
595:
588:
583:
581:
576:
574:
569:
568:
565:
556:
547:
538:
531:
527:
523:
519:
515:
514:
510:
500:
497:
491:
488:
482:
479:
473:
470:
464:
461:
455:
452:
446:
443:
437:
434:
428:
425:
419:
416:
410:
407:
403:
399:
395:
391:
387:
382:
379:
367:
366:www.uspto.gov
363:
356:
353:
349:
347:
343:
335:
333:
328:
323:
320:
315:
310:
308:
307:Samuel Nelson
300:
294:
290:
288:
283:
278:
276:
272:
267:
262:
260:
253:
247:
245:
243:
234:
227:
225:
221:
214:
212:
208:
206:
202:
201:US patent law
198:
194:
190:
189:
178:
174:
170:
166:
162:
159:Case opinions
157:
152:
148:
144:
140:
139:Samuel Nelson
136:
132:
128:
124:
120:
116:
113:
110:
108:
105:
103:Chief Justice
102:
101:
99:
94:
89:
85:
81:
75:
74:
69:
66:
62:
58:
55:
52:
48:
41:
37:
27:
22:
16:
1021: (1863)
1016:
1013: (1859)
1008:
1005: (1857)
1000:
997: (1852)
992:
989: (1849)
984:
981: (1841)
976:
973: (1837)
968:
951:Criminal law
517:
499:
490:
481:
472:
463:
454:
445:
436:
427:
418:
409:
404: (1852).
385:
381:
369:. Retrieved
365:
355:
339:
330:
325:
321:
317:
312:
304:
286:
284:
280:
277:
273:
269:
264:
258:
255:
251:
239:
222:
218:
209:
187:
186:
185:
142:
130:
118:
71:
53:
15:
1018:Prize Cases
594:Taney Court
127:John Catron
115:John McLean
1060:Categories
555:OpenJurist
336:References
215:Background
88:U.S. LEXIS
86:367; 1852
706:By volume
698:Decisions
346:talk page
60:Citations
1033:Statutes
961:Landmark
939:By topic
659:Clifford
654:Campbell
639:Woodbury
624:McKinley
602:Justices
516:Text of
371:June 18,
342:Bluebook
305:Justice
240:Justice
164:Majority
82:156; 14
885:65 (24)
880:64 (23)
875:63 (22)
870:62 (21)
865:61 (20)
860:60 (19)
855:59 (18)
850:58 (17)
845:57 (16)
840:56 (15)
835:55 (14)
830:54 (13)
825:53 (12)
820:52 (11)
815:51 (10)
752:41 (16)
747:40 (15)
742:39 (14)
737:38 (13)
732:37 (12)
727:36 (11)
722:35 (10)
614:Barbour
301:Dissent
172:Dissent
926:68 (1)
908:67 (2)
903:66 (1)
810:50 (9)
805:49 (8)
800:48 (7)
795:47 (6)
790:46 (5)
785:45 (4)
780:44 (3)
775:43 (2)
770:42 (1)
669:Miller
664:Swayne
649:Curtis
634:Nelson
629:Daniel
619:Catron
558:
552:
549:
543:
540:
537:Justia
534:
400:)
388:,
362:"MPEP"
242:McLean
145:
143:·
141:
133:
131:·
129:
121:
119:·
117:
84:L. Ed.
918:Wall.
895:Black
679:Field
674:Davis
644:Grier
609:Taney
524:
392:
762:How.
714:Pet.
530:How.
528:(14
526:U.S.
398:How.
396:(14
394:U.S.
373:2023
205:Mayo
80:How.
73:more
65:U.S.
402:156
90:433
78:14
68:156
63:55
1062::
522:55
520:,
390:55
364:.
586:e
579:t
572:v
375:.
76:)
70:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
