¶1Appeal from the District Court of the United States for the District of Massachusetts.
¶2Roberts, Cushman & Woodberry, of Boston, Mass. (Odin Roberts and Richard F. Walker, of Boston, Mass., of counsel), for appellant.
¶3Nathan Heard, of Boston, Mass. (Frederick A. Tennant, of Boston, Mass., on the brief), for appellees.
¶4Before BINGHAM, JOHNSON, and ANDERSON, Circuit Judges.
¶7This is a suit- for infringement of letters patent No. 15,602, dated May 14,1923, and No. 1,524,573, dated January 27, 1925, applied for by Roland B. Respess and issued to Respro, Inc., assignee.
¶8In the . District Court there was a decree dismissing the bill of complaint. The present appeal relates only to the second patent. This patent involves the process of making unwoven fabrics and the .product thereby produced. The defenses are invalidity and non-infringement.
¶9The claims in issue are 1 to 9, inclusive, process claims, and 20, 21, and 22, for the product.
¶10In the District Court it was found that claims 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, and 9 were not infringed, as they embodied a step not used by the defendant, but that, if they were to be construed as the plaintiff contended, they were invalid for want of patentable invention, as were the other claims in issue.
¶11After an examination of the record and giving due consideration to the extended arguments of counsel, oral and written, we are of the opinion that claims 3, 4, 6-9, are not infringed, and that these claims, if construed as the plaintiff contends, and the remaining claims in issue, viewed in the light of the pri- or art, are invalid.
¶12The decree of the District Court is affirmed, with costs to the appellees.