New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1911-10-12
KRUppS LOSE PATENT SUIT
No infringement on Armor Plate
Process, Decides u. S. Court.
OPINION or GREAT MOMENT
Two Of German Firm 8 Patents
Invalid, Says Judge in Dismiss
ing Suits Against Steel Co.

PhfadAlphia. Oct ia decision ~ world
wide Importance was handed down by the
United States Circuit Court Of Appeals here
to-day. when II dismissed four suits
brought by the Krupp Company Of ser
many. against the Midvale Steel Con1pany,
Of Philadelphia 70 restrain the Pennsyl-
vania corporation from infringing On pat
ents for = process OF manufacturing srnnor
plate The decision was given BY Judge
Joseph Burlington. and sustsins the opinion
OF the Circuit Court. which had decreed
tha, the evidence produced before the lower
court was not sufficiently satisfactory.
either IN quality or amount % establish
infringement The appetite court goes
step further. and declares that two certain
claims in two 81 the Krupp patents are in
valid. and that. therefore, there could not
BE- AZ infringement
The opinion Of the appellate court IS not
Only important - the maritime nations OF
the world that Use arn1or plate in their
navies. but is Of the greatest moment 70
me manufacturers q armor plate IN the
United States Wren the latest processes
~ arnor plate manufactured by the hrupp
company became known. the United states
government became interested. and II re-
suited in the Carnegie Steel Company. now
part ~ he United States Steel Corpora
ton. and the Bethlehem Steel COMPANY
obtaining licenses 20 manufacture the
Krtlpp article in the United States Amer
can Warships we're equipped with these
plates. and In time statements we're made
on the floor Of Congress that there was
combination in the United States 70 keep
up the price OF armar plate. Tnen me
NIidvalA Steel COMPANY became success
rur lower bidder FOR government contracts
and rttle has since been heard Of alleged
combinations IN this respect u is said
that had the MidvaIe company lost It's suits
4, might nave been shut out from sue
cessfully bidding against the concerns mold
ing licenses 70 manufacture sruor plate on
the Krupn process.
The FOUR suits involved alleged infringe
uent on a process Of manufacturing arnlor
nlate. On a process ~ improving me quail
NV NJ steel a-r1r plate on process o.
hardening and toughenins armor plate ana
on q process ot Improving armor plate.
Judge Burlington. In his opinion SAYS
that. IN view OF thA Importance OF arrnor
plate 70 several governments, Of the TACT
that numerous companies both n tnis couH-
try and abroad who are not parties u RMS
bill are interested n the subject matter o.
tni= case tho court felt itself impeled 70
record its views more az length than II
would otherwise 10.
The opinion OF the court Is purely technl-
cal and reviews the history o. the manu-
fac ture ~ arnor plate from the time the
genius Of John Ericsson. the swede. gave
% the United states the original ironclsd
monitor down 70 the latest processes IN tne
ra7ufa cturs ~ aruor plate
The court - <es ~ the patents and de-
clares that the fifth claim In a patent
granted on February p. 1928. for process
in the manufacture Of armor plate IS void
FOR lack OF patentable novelty" II also &C.
c-aes tina. 4 claim In q Patent granted ~
Februa-v 8, 1910 for A process Of ir1prov-
ing the quality Of steel arnor plate is void.