|
|
Detrola Radio & Television Corp. v. Hazeltine Corp., 313 U.S. 259 (1941)
Contents:
Show Summary
Hide Summary
General SummaryThis case is from a collection containing the full text of over 16,000 Supreme Court cases from 1793 to the present. The body of Supreme Court decisions are, effectively, the final interpretation of the Constitution. Only an amendment to the Constitution can permanently overturn an interpretation and this has happened only four times in American history.
Detrola Radio & Television Corp. v. Hazeltine Corp., 313 U.S. 259 (1941)
Please note: this case begins in mid-page. It therefore shares a citation with the last page of the previous case. If you are attempting to follow a link to the last page of 313 U.S. 256, click here.
Detrola Radio & Television Corp. v. Hazeltine Corporation No. 666 Argued April 7, 1941 Decided May 12, 1941 313 U.S. 259
CERTIORARI TO THE CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT
Syllabus
Wheeler reissue patent, No.19,744, Claims 1-7, inclusive, and 9-13, inclusive, relating to amplifiers in modulated current-carrying signaling systems, wherein the limit of amplification is automatically maintained substantially at a predetermined level held invalid for want of invention over the prior art. P. 268.
The alleged invention, as upheld by the court below, was of improved means for obtaining automatic amplification control by the combination in a radio receiver of a diode detector with a high resistance connected between the anode of the detector and the cathode of the amplifying tube, and a direct connection between the anode of the detector and the grid of the amplifier for impressing negative potential upon the latter, thus obtaining from the signal voltage a so-called linear response to the variations in the amplitude of the signal current.
Wheeler accomplished an old result by a combination of means which, singly or in similar combination, were disclosed by the prior art, and notwithstanding the fact that he was ignorant of the pending applications which antedated his claimed date of invention and eventuated into patents, he was not, in fact, the first inventor, since his advance over the prior art, if any, required only the exercise of the skill of the art.
117 F.2d 238 reversed.
Certiorari, 312 U.S. 671, to review a decree which affirmed the District Court in upholding a patent, enjoining infringement, and retaining jurisdiction to take an account of profits, assess damages, etc.
Contents:
Chicago: U.S. Supreme Court, "Syllabus," Detrola Radio & Television Corp. v. Hazeltine Corp., 313 U.S. 259 (1941) in 313 U.S. 259 313 U.S. 260. Original Sources, accessed November 22, 2024, http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=529AYG3FJZGFB77.
MLA: U.S. Supreme Court. "Syllabus." Detrola Radio & Television Corp. v. Hazeltine Corp., 313 U.S. 259 (1941), in 313 U.S. 259, page 313 U.S. 260. Original Sources. 22 Nov. 2024. http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=529AYG3FJZGFB77.
Harvard: U.S. Supreme Court, 'Syllabus' in Detrola Radio & Television Corp. v. Hazeltine Corp., 313 U.S. 259 (1941). cited in 1941, 313 U.S. 259, pp.313 U.S. 260. Original Sources, retrieved 22 November 2024, from http://originalsources.com/Document.aspx?DocID=529AYG3FJZGFB77.
|