Paterson Electronic Die Co. v. Plastiseal Inc., (1974) 2 N.R. 474 (FCA)

• Judge: Jackett, C.J., Pratte, J. and Hyde, D.J.
• Court: Federal Court of Appeal (Canada)
• Case Date: March 29, 1974
• Jurisdiction: Canada (Federal)
• Citations: (1974), 2 N.R. 474 (FCA)

Paterson Electronic Die v. Plastiseal Inc. (1974), 2 N.R. 474 (FCA)

MLB headnote and full text

Paterson Electronic Die Co. v. Plastiseal Inc.

Indexed As: Paterson Electronic Die Co. v. Plastiseal Inc.

Federal Court of Appeal

Jackett, C.J., Pratte, J. and Hyde, D.J.

March 29, 1974.

Summary:

This case arose out of an action for infringement of letters patent for an invention. The letters patent in question were granted in respect to an invention for bookcasings or bookbindings. The plaintiff conceived the idea that the way to eliminate an unsightly outer edge on plastic bookbindings was to attach the outside plastic cover to the inside plastic cover on the inside - see paragraph 8. The Trial Division of the Federal Court declared that the letters patent in question were invalid and dismissed the plaintiff's action.

On appeal to the Federal Court of Appeal the appeal was dismissed and the judgment of the Trial Division was affirmed. The Federal Court of Appeal held that there was no "invention" in conceiving the idea of the way to eliminate the unsightly outer edge on the plastic bindings. The Federal Court of Appeal also held that there was no "invention" in conceiving the idea that the way to attach the outside plastic cover to the inside plastic cover was to use plastic on both the inside and outside so that they could be fused - see paragraph 8.

Patents of Invention - Topic 1530

Grounds for invalidity - Want of subject matter - Improvement on something known - Action for infringement of letters patent for an invention - The plaintiff conceived the idea that the way to eliminate an unsightly outer edge on plastic bookbindings was to attach the outside cover to the inside cover on the inside - See paragraph 8 - The Federal Court of Appeal dismissed the plaintiff's action for infringement.

Cases Noticed:

Commissioner of Patents v. Farbwerke Horchst Aktiengessellschaft Vormals Meister Lucius & Bruning, [1964] S.C.R. 49, folld. [para. 4].

Crosley Radio Corp. v. Canadian General Electric Co. Ltd., [1936] S.C.R. 551, folld. [para. 4].

Statutes Noticed:

Patent Act, R.S.C. 1970, c. P-4, sect. 2.

Counsel:

P. Thompson, for the appellants;

S. Godinsky, Q.C. and R. Uditsky, for the respondent.

This case was heard by the Federal Court of Appeal at Ottawa, Ontario on March 27, 28 and 29, 1974. Judgment was delivered from the bench on March 29, 1974.

The judgment of the court was delivered by JACKETT, C.J.