Case Name: J. B. MONETTE CO. v. KURTZON et al.
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 1921-03-12
Citations: 272 F. 687
Docket Number: No. 2817
Parties: J. B. MONETTE CO. v. KURTZON et al.
Judges: Before BAKER, EVANS, and PACE, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: Federal Reporter
Volume: 272
Pages: 687–687

Head Matter:
J. B. MONETTE CO. v. KURTZON et al.
(Circuit Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit.
March 12, 1921.)
No. 2817.
Patents <§=>328 — 878,147 and 971,300, for «ranter protecting devices, hold void for lack of invention.
■ The Monette patents, No. 878,147 and No. 971,300, for counter protecting devices, held void for lack of invention.
Appeal from the District Court of the United States for the Eastern Division of the Northern District of Illinois.
Suit in Equity by the J. B. Monette Company against George B. Kurtzon and Morris Kurtzon, doing business as the Garden City Plating & Manufacturing Company. Decree for defendants, and complainant appeals.
Affirmed.
Cyrus W. Rice and Wm. R. Ruinmler, both of Chicago, Ill., for appellant.
Benjamin T. Roodhouse, of Chicago, Ill., for appellees.
Before BAKER, EVANS, and PACE, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
On final hearing appellant's suit for alleged infringement of claims 2 and 4 of patent No. 878,147, and claim 1 of patent No. 971,300, both issued to Monette, was dismissed for want of equity.
"Counter protecting devices" did not owe their origin to Monette. In numerous prior art structures standards and brackets had been attached to the front edge of shop counters, and wire or glass had been affixed to the standards and brackets in such a way as to shut off the goods on the counter from the customers in front and to leave them accessible to the clerks behind the counter. Nothing remained for Monette or others except detail improvements. While his claims are phrased in rather formidable language, their substance, viewed in the light of the prior art, involved only such expedients in forming standards and brackets to receive plates of glass as were obvious to the ordinary workman.
The decree is affirmed.