Crown Cork & Seal Co. v. Ferdinand Gutmann Co.

Warth invented a method for applying small disks of paper or foil to beverage-bottle corks, preventing contact between the beverage and the cork. The method required a specific form of preheating. Warth applied for a patent in 1927 and 1930. However, Warth removed the preheating element from the 1930 application prior to the issuance of a patent in 1931. In 1929, Johnson applied for a patent on the preheating method alone, which was granted in 1932. In 1933, Warth filed a divisional patent application—i.e., an application made to preserve a claim that was split off from a parent application—for the preheating element, which mirrored the claims of the Johnson patent. The divisional patent was granted in 1934. The original Warth patent was also reissued to correct an error in 1934. In an interference proceeding, the United States Patent and Trademark Office gave Warth’s divisional patent application the benefit of his 1927 filing date. Later, in an infringement action in federal district court, the Warth reissue and divisional patents were both deemed valid and infringed. The court of appeals reversed, holding that the reissue patent was not infringed and that the divisional patent was invalid because of a delay in filing of more than two years after the filing of the 1930 parent application—a delay for which Warth did not provide a reason. This decision was based on the two-year statutory period for the defense of laches. The case was appealed to the United States Supreme Court.