878 .. a FBPEBAI» BBPOBTER. �Fitzgerald. It wa^ held that[the assignment cunveyed the legal title to the patent afterwards issued. The court held that, as the assigner possessed the inchoate right to the ex- clusive use of the invention at the time he made the assign- ment, and had made the disoovery and prepared the specifi- cation of the patent, and as the assignment was intended to operate upon the perfect legal title which the inventer then had a right to obtain, because it requested that the patent might issue to the assignee, there was no sound reason for restraining the assignment to the inchoate interest and re- quiring a further transfer of the patent. In the present case, the patent had been allowed and ordei;ed to issue before the assignment was made, and the assignment refers to that fact, and to the f act that the purehase is of all the right, title and interest of Heath in the inveriiion "in consequence of the grant of letters patent therefor." The defendant does not set up any right derived jfrom Decker.: Under the above decision it must be held that when the, patent issued to Heath the legal right to the property ^t created beeame vested in the Company on the recording of the assignment to it. �The plaintiff is entitled to the usual interlocutory decreo fot an account and a perpetuai injunction. ���The Brothers. Beaoham and anoth^r ». Beck and others. �(District Churi, D. Mwryland. May 20, 1881.) �. LiBEi, IN Persojsam— Paetibs. �Repairs were put upon a domestic vessel by a flrm of ship-buildera, of which one of the part owners was a member. �Libel in peraonam was instituted by the flrm against all the part owners to obtain a decree against theta *n solidoioi the repairs. . Ildd, thai such a libel in personam, in which the same person is one of the libellants and also one of the respondents, could not be ttiailntaiiied. ' �In Admiralty. Libel in personam for repairs. ��� �
