Cannabis Ruderalis

How this document has been cited

The franchise which the patent grants, consists altogether in the right to exclude every one from making, using, or vending the thing patented, without the permission of the patentee. This is all that he obtains by the patent
W] hen the machine passes to the hands of the purchaser, it is no longer within the limits of the monopoly
It passes outside of it, and is no longer under the protection of the act of Congress... The implement or machine becomes his private, individual property, not protected by the laws of the United States, but by the laws of the State in which it is situated.
In the exclusive rights to make, use, and vend, fairly construed, with a view to making the purpose of Congress effectual, reside the extent of the patent monopoly under the statutes of the United States.
- in Bauer & Cie v. O'Donnell, 1913 and 41 similar citations
The right of the owner of a patented machine, without any conditions attached to his ownership, to continue the use of his machine during an extended term of the patent, is well settled.
- in Paper-Bag Cases, 1882 and 34 similar citations
That absurd result would cast a cloud of uncertainty over every sale, and every product in the possession of a customer of the licensee, and would be wholly inconsistent with the fundamental purpose of patent exhaustion—to prohibit postsale restrictions on the use of a patented article.
But sale of it exhausts the monopoly in that article and the patentee may not thereafter, by virtue of his patent, control the use or disposition of the article.
- in United States v. Univis Lens Co., 1942 and 39 similar citations

Cited by

734 F. 3d 1361 - Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit 2013
Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit 2013
Discusses cited case at length[CITATION] FIRE EXTINGUISHER MANUF'CO. v. Graham
Circuit Court, WD Virginia 1883
615 F. Supp. 2d 575 - Dist. Court, ED Kentucky 2009
224 US 1 - Supreme Court 1912
68 US 340 - Supreme Court 1864
846 F. Supp. 522 - Dist. Court, ED Texas 1994
596 F. 2d 952 - Court of Customs and Patent Appeals 1979

Leave a Reply