The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1859-02-19

grant was right to the use OF any renewed N4I
extepded) patents In which he (Goodyear) might
have an interest, whether the patent which might
be renewed, and in which he might have an inte-
rest, was then issued or might thereafter be Issued
In this point of view, without taxing any otner
rraut ia broad enough to include renewal Tor ex-
fension) of patent issued to him. For "all pa
tents in which he might have an interest" include
n patent issued to him.
In the deed to the Naugatuck Company there is
a covenant by Goodyear as follows:-"And the
said Charles Goodyear does hereby, for himself,
his heirs, executors administrators and assigns, Co
venant and agree to and with the said Naugatuck
India Rubber Company not to make, use vend. or
TO grant to any other person or company whatever
any other license to make, use vend said prepa-
rations or improvements in the preparation OF
India rubber, or to apply the same to any OF the
, purposes to which the same can be usefully ap-
Piled during the continuance of the Incense here
inbefore specified and granted to the Naugatuck
Company" This covenant was subject to certain
The covenant admits that the rights granted by
the license to the Naugatuck Company might come
to end before the expiration OF right secured to
Goodyear by patent, when Goodyear would be
permitted to go on and make grants And it is
argued that If the license granted to the company
by the terms of the grant was to continue during
the term of any extended patent, that Goodyear
could not grant right to use " said preparations"
to any other person at any time; that there would
be no time after the time that the license to the
Naugatuck Company was to continue, when grants
10 SUCH Otler persons cOul0 De MADE unless Sucn u
construction is put upon the length of time that
the grant to the company is to be enjoyed as will
limit it to the unexpred terms of the patents then
in existence and will not extend it for the term Of
renewed patent.
In the indenture entered into between Goodyear
and the Naugatuck Company, there are several
covenants on the part Of the company, which If
they did not observe and perform, the license was
TO be void and of no effect.
1t is expressly provided that If the company shall
for the term of one year neglect or refuse, or be
unable from want OF means, to prosecute the busi-
ness contemplated. or to stamp the articles manu-
featured, that the object of the instrument should
fail for said term of year, then at the eXpira-
ton of the year the license shall become and be
void, and of no effect, after said year. When it
thus becomes void and of no effect, Goodyear would
have the right to grant licenses to said prepa
rations or improvements named in the covenant to
wh0msOever he pleased
When, therefore, the deed of the Oath of May,
1868, was executed the license to the Naugatuck
Company was in full force. While it remained in
full force Goodyear was precluded from the right
to make such q license as the last mentioned deed
to Day purported to make. He had, indeed, the
right to sell for stipulated price, sum in gross,
the exclusive right of making, using and vending
said preparations or improvements, OF Of applying
the same to or for any specific purpose or purposes,
provided that before the sale the Naugatuck Com
pany should have the right to become the purchaser
thereof at and for such price or sum in gross; and
such sale to third person could not be made, ex-
cept on the neglect OF REFUSAL as aforesaid OF the
@s~<16otdSh
thereof Goodyear never attempted to exercise this
latter right At the time the deed of the Gath of May
was executed, the Union Company had succeeded
to oil the rights which the Naugatuck Company
had acquired from Goodyear. And on the 18th of
September, 1863 the said Union Company, for the
consideration of the gross sum of thirty thousand
dollars paid to Goodyear, and of certain tariffs
agreed to be paid, received conveyance from him
of full and exclusive license, right and privilege
to use the invention Of vulcanized rubber, original
Iy patented June l5 1874, and extended tor seven
years from the 10Th of June, 1858, in the manuflc
ture of all braided, woven, cemented or sewed
fabrics, or such can be covered or protect
ed, one both sides, with substances other than
rubber and in all smooth elastic shirred goods; and
also to make and sell India rubber threads of vu
canized rubber and all threads sheets of rubber
which are can be made or finished by union with
or are to be covered by fbrous substances"
Having disposed of this question, the necessities
OF the case do not require me to determine the
other question, whether the deed of the oath of
May, 1858, is sufficient to convey the equitable
right which it purports to convey, provided at the
time it was executed such equitable right was vest
ed in Goodyear And this opinion has already been
so extended that must avoid the discussion of any
questions which have been presented, the determi-
nation OF which is not necessary to just dsposi-
ton of the case.
From these views it follows that the motion for
an Injunction must be dismissed.