Copeland-Chatterson Co. v. Paquette

Copeland-Chatterson Co. v. Paquette

The claimed invention was not patentable because it lacked novelty and patentable subject‑matter—the folding and scoring of manifold sheets produced no new mode of operation and was obvious to ordinary skill; the asserted combination was not disclosed in the specification; therefore the patent was invalid and the appeal dismissed.

Citation
(1907) 38 SCR 451
Parties
Appellant/plaintiff: Copeland-Chatterson Company; Respondent/defendant: Jean Paquette; Respondents/defendants: Victor Guertin and Henri Guertin (The Guertin Printing Co.)
Court
Supreme Court of Canada
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
2 April 1907
Procedural Posture
Patent Infringement Appeal / On Appeal From the Exchequer Court of Canada to the Supreme Court of Canada (final Disposition)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs; judgment of Exchequer Court affirmed.
Legal Topics
Novelty, Patentability, Utility, Subject Matter, Estoppel by Purchase/license, Combination/obviousness, Infringement
Source Language
English
Intellectual Property Patent Law Novelty Patentability Utility Subject Matter Estoppel by Purchase/license Combination/obviousness +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 34 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Copeland-Chatterson Company

Appellant/plaintiff

Jean Paquette

Respondent/defendant

Victor Guertin and Henri Guertin (The Guertin Printing Co.)

Respondents/defendants

Procedural Posture

Patent Infringement Appeal / On Appeal From the Exchequer Court of Canada to the Supreme Court of Canada (final Disposition)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the patented folding and scoring of manifold sheets constituted patentable subject-matter
  2. 2 Whether the device was novel and non‑obvious
  3. 3 Whether the specification claimed a patentable combination

Ratio Decidendi

The claimed invention was not patentable because it lacked novelty and patentable subject‑matter—the folding and scoring of manifold sheets produced no new mode of operation and was obvious to ordinary skill; the asserted combination was not disclosed in the specification; therefore the patent was invalid and the appeal dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs; judgment of Exchequer Court affirmed.

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed with costs.
  • Judgment of the Exchequer Court of Canada (dismissing the plaintiffs' action) affirmed.