IP
Haverhill Roller Toboggan Co. v. Automatic Roller Toboggan Co. et al.
47 F. 219·United States Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts·1891
Brief incoming
Hand-reviewed Bluebook brief (procedural posture, facts, issue, holding, reasoning, dissent) ships once the AI generation pipeline runs through this case. Join the waitlist to get notified when 1L briefs go live.
Opinion
Haverhill Roller Toboggan Co. v. Automatic Roller Toboggan Co. et al.
(Circuit Court, D. Massachusetts.
August 6, 1891.)
Patents for Inventions — Toboggan Slims.
The first claim of the Floyd patent, No. 867,386, for a spiral toboggan slide, terminating immediately below the starling point, is void for want of novelty.
In Equity.
W. A. Macleod, for complainant.
W. K. Richardson, for defendants.
[MAJORITY — Nelson, J.]
Nelson, J.
The first claim of the Floyd patent. No. 867,280, for a sliding hill constructed in spiral form, and terminating ata point immediately below the starting point, involves no element of novelty or invention, and is therefore invalid for want of patentability. A decree is to be entered dismissing the plaintiff’s bill, with costs. Ordered accordingly.