Case ID: f_284/html/0272-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

CAMP v. MURRAY CO.
    (Circuit Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
    October 10, 1922.)
    No. 3883.
    Patents <§=>312(3)— Evidence held to establish defense of license.
    Evidence held to establish a license to defendants, which constituted a defense to the charge of infringement.
    @s»For other cases see same topic & KEY-NUMBER in all Key-Numbered Digests & Indexes
    Appeal from the District Court of the United States for the Northern District of Georgia; Samuel H. Sibley, Judge.
    Suit in equity by Warner H. Camp against the Murray Company. Decree for defendant, and complainant appeals.
    Affirmed.
    Mac Asbill, Horace Russell, and Edgar Watkins, all of Atlanta, Ga., for appellant. (
    W. D. Ellis, Jr., of Atlanta, Ga., and Oliver Mitchell, of Boston, Mass., for appellee.
    Before WALKER, BRYAN, and KING, Circuit Judges.
   PER CURIAM.

This was a suit by the appellant, claiming as the owner of letters patent issued to him, seeking to charge the appellee with liability for making, using, and vending to others articles covered by the patent. The appellee set up the defense that what it did was in pursuance of a license or agreement granted or made by the appellant. We are of opinion that the evidence adduced called for the conclusion that by a valid agreement or understanding between the parties the appellee acquired the right to do what was complained of by the appellant.

It follows that the appellant is not entitled to a reversal of the decree appealed from. That decree is affirmed.