+40 



THE INDIA RUBBER WORLD 



[April 1, 1920. 



(32.275.) Importer in Argentina desires agency for the sale 

 of rubber goods, and oiled and waterproofed clothes. Corre- 

 spondence may be in English. 



(32,315.) Commercial agent in British West Africa desires to 

 represent manufacturers in the sale of automobile tires. 



(32,311.) Firms in Palestine and Egypt wish to secure 

 agencies for tlie sale of rubber overshces. Quote c.i.f. ports of 

 Palestine. 



(32.328.) Commission agent and wholesaler in Syria desires 

 to communicate with exporters of rubber goods. 



(32.331.) A firm in Norway desires to purchase rubber and 

 rubber goods. Quote f.o.b. American port or c.i.f. Norwegian 

 port. Payment through banks. 



(32,349.) A firm of importers in Syria wishes to communicate 

 with exporters of rubber shoes, rubber and rubber goods. 



JUDICIAL DECISIONS. 



TUFFORD HEEL PATENTS UPHELD. 



RUBBER HEEL MAKERS AND DEALERS have followed with excep- 

 tional interest the long struggle in many courts of the 

 I. T. S. Rubber Co., Elyria, Ohio, to establish its sole right to 

 manufacture and market the type of heel invented by John G. 

 Tuttord, of Elyria, the patents on which had been assigned to 

 the I. T. S. company. Some of the largest concerns in the rub- 

 ber trade were made defendants in the lawsuits begun by this 

 company, and the alleged infringers were enjoined from further 

 manufacture and sale of the heels said to be identical with those 

 described in the Tufford letters patent. 



Nine favorable decisions were obtained by the I. T. S. com- 

 pany, and one decision was adverse. The company took the 

 latter to the United States Circuit Court of Appeals, and it re- 

 versed the unfavorable decision. Defendants in the litigation in- 

 cluded the Panther Rubber Manufacturing Co., Boston, Massa- 

 chusetts, the Fetzer & Spies Leather Co., of Cleveland, Ohio, the 

 Elyria National Rubber Heel Co., Elyria, Ohio, the United States 

 Rubber Co., New York City, H. H. Hackman & Co., Cleveland, 

 Ohio, and the'Consolidated Rubber Co. and the Hill Rubber Co., 

 both of Elyria. Ohio. 



The Elyria National Rubber Heel Co., after the United States 

 District Court at Cleveland had enjoined it from manufacturing 

 and had declared the Tufford patent valid and having been in- 

 fringed, took the decision to the United States Circuit Court of 

 Appeals for the Sixth Circuit and an early hearing is expected 

 in that tribunal. 



The Tut^'ord patent on the heel is Reissue No. 14,049, and on 

 the mold for making the heel No. 1,177,833. the latter having 

 been granted April 4, 1916. The salient feature of the invention 

 is the "curve." a concavity or part-spherical recess throughout 

 the upper surface of the heel, which characteristic rival concerns 

 are alleged to have duplicated. 



Reference to this peculiarity of the heel is thus made in the 

 Tufford patent grant: "When the heel or lift is placed against 

 the flat under surface of a leather or other shoe heel and pressure 

 applied to the resihent heel or lift, a vacuum or suction cup may 

 be formed whereby the heel or lift will be held to the shoe tem- 

 porarily until the nails can be applied. A further object of the 

 invention is to produce a heel, which, when applied to the shoe, 

 will have a flat tread surface and which may be equipped with 

 fastening devices so located that the heel can be easily trimmed 

 down to the required size." 



I. T. S. Rubber Co. vs. Panther Rubber MANUFACTtmiNG Co. 

 —United States Circuit Court of Appeals, First Circuit. De- 

 cided May 29, 1919; rehearing denied, July 23, 1919. Appeal 

 from the District Court of the United States for the District of 

 Massachusetts in the matter of the Tufi'ord patent No. 1,117,833 

 for makiiia rublier heels. 



The decision states distinctly that the device was not antici- 

 pated by the Nerger mold ; that the claim for the particular 

 structure and the method of applying it is valid and was in- 

 fringed. The decision of the lower court overruled and appeal 

 allowed. ("Federal Reporter," Volume 260, page 934; "The Offi- 

 cial Gazette," United States Patent Ofi)ce, February 17, 1920.) 



United States Rubber Co. vs. I. T. S. Rubber Co. — United 

 States Circuit Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit. Decided 

 October 7, 1919. Appeal from a preliminary injunction granted 

 by the District Court in the matter of the Tufford patent. 



Decree affirmed with the statement that the infringement 

 question is settled by the Fetzen & Spies Leather Co. decision, 

 except as to one minor point, which is obscured by its wording. 

 While the court does not believe that it makes any difference, 

 it remits that point to the District Court for decision. ("Federal 

 Reporter," Volume 260, page 947.) 



Fetzer & Spies Leather Co., vs. I. T. S. Rubber Co. — United 

 States Circuit Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit. Appeal 

 from the District Court of the United States for the Eastern 

 Division of the Northern District of Ohio in the matter of the 

 Tufiford patent for rubber heels, reissue No. 14.049. Decided 

 October 7, 1919. 



Decision states that the delay in applying for the reissue was 

 reasonable ; that the Tufford patent is valid as against both the 

 Nerger and the Ferguson patents, not only because the Court of 

 Appeals for the First District has so decided, but because the 

 process is original as the Court demonstrates in detail. It also 

 asserts that the real contestant is the Foster Rubber Co. Judg- 

 ment of District Judge aflirmed and appeal disallowed. ("Fed- 

 eral Reporter," Volume 260, page 939; "The Official Gazette," 

 United States Patent Oflfice, February 3, 1920.) 



MuNGER vs. Firestone Tire & Rubber Co. } 



United States 



Munger vs. The B. F. Goodrich Co. ( 



Circuit Court of Appeals for the Second District. Decided No- 

 vember 12, 1919. 



Decree of District Court, dismissing bills of discovery against 

 the two companies, is affirmed. Louis De F. Munger, inventor 

 of an improvement in pneumatic tires, after the expiration of 

 his patent, brought suit against both companies for infringe- 

 ment, and asked in the bills of discovery that the companies 

 should furnish him with detailed statements regarding their 

 business and profits. The District judge refused to allow this 

 until after the infringement suit had been tried and decided. 

 ("Federal Reporter," Volume 261, page 921.) 



MODIFICATIONS OF BRITISH PATENT LAWS. 



The term for which British patents are valid is made by the 

 nev.' Patents Act, 16 years instead of 14, and the period within 

 which complete specifications can be lodged and applications 

 with provisional specifications can be filed is extended to nine 

 months instead of six. A patentee who can show that he suf- 

 fered loss or damage in regard to his patent on account of war 

 conditions may obtain an extension of the time of his patent. 



By the nev/ act the patentee at any time after the patent is 

 sealed, niLv request to have it endorsed with the words "License 

 of Right." An inventor does not prejudice his right to apply 

 for a patent by describing it before a learned society; he must 

 give notice beforehand, however, and must apply for his patent 

 within six months of the reading or the publication of his de- 

 scription. 



Rubber enters into the making of many of the exhibits 

 in the Toy Fair recently held at the Hotel Imperial in New York 

 City. The United States Rubber Co. exhibited dolls and animals 

 in red rubber as well as white, while rubber continues to be used 

 as the motive power for toy airplanes and submarines, for stamps, 

 for tires, and other parts of toys. 



