High Court of Australia
caunss,
H, J. Green, Gort, Print., Melb.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF AUSTRALIA.
Hume Pipe Company (Australia) Limited
Ménier Industries Limited (re application No. 104715)
Judgment delivered at Melbouene......
on......8th November 1940
|
re Application No. 104715 by
Monier Industries Ltd.
HUME | PIPE' | COMPANY (AUSTRALIA) LTD.
ve
MONIER INDUSTRIES LIMITED
Order :
Appeal allowed. Decision appealed from discharged. Dechare that the grant ought not to be made in respect of Claims i, 2, 4, & 5 and ought not to be made in respect of Claims 3, 6, 7, & 8. unless the Respondent Company within two months applies for,and on such application obtains, leave to amend the specification with regard to them. Declare that, in respect of Claims 9 & 10, the opposition ought not to be sustained. Remit the opposition to the Deputy Commissioner to be dealt with consistently with this Order and according to law. The time for sealing the patent to be extended until one week after the ime expiration of the time for appealing from the final decision of the Commissioner in respect of the application to amend, or on the final application for 2 patent, or after the determination
of any such appeal as the case may be. The Respondent
company to pay the costs of the appeal.
HUME PIPE COMPANY(AUSTRALIA) LIMITED, ~ AND
MONIER INDUSTRIES LIMITED.
ve. MONIER INDUSTRIES IMITED.
Judgment. Ri C.J.
In thematter of application No 104,715 for Letters Patent I agree in the view of the Deputy Commissioner of Patents that the form of invention disclosed by the specification differs from the prior publications relied upon both No 8561 and No 161,202 and the manifes- tation of No 8561 described in the diagram marked exhibit CCH6. The difference lies in the fact that the whole chassis is jolted and not merely.one drum and that the jolting is done by the movement of the chassis upon a transw-rse pivot or axis, This conclusion the Deputy Commissioner expresses as follows:- "The feature of a rocking chassis "runs through all the Applicant's claims, and while it may produce an "ultimate result which is the same as that produced by all the machines "of the prior art,it does so by a means which in my opinion has not "previously been disclosed,and furthermore this different means of
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate