Bendix Corp. v. Balax, Inc.
United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
421 F.2d 809, 164 U.S.P.Q. 485 (1970)
- Written by Eric Miller, JD
Facts
The German patent office issued a form of patent protection called a Gebrauchsmuster (GM), which provided a lower level of protection and had fewer requirements than a standard German patent. Although GMs were considered valid patents by United States courts, caselaw had established a rule that limited the use of a GM as prior art to the subject of the GM—i.e., what was patented—as opposed to things that might be considered ancillary to the claimed invention. In a patent-infringement dispute between Bendix Corp. (plaintiff) and Balax, Inc. (defendant) in federal district court, Balax alleged that Bendix’s patent was anticipated by an existing GM. The GM claimed a thread-pressing tap with a shape, disposition, and arrangement reflected by a drawing and a specification. The trial court held that what was patented by the GM could only be construed according to the bare words of what was claimed, making the GM’s specifications off-limits to the court’s consideration. This resulted in a finding that Bendix’s patent was valid and infringed by Balax. Balax appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Hastings, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
