United States v. Univis Lens Company
|United States v. Univis Lens Company by
|United States Supreme Court explaining the exhaustion doctrine and applying it to find an antitrust violation because Univis’s ownership of patents did not exclude its restrictive practices from the antitrust laws. The Univis case stands for the proposition that when an article sold by a patent holder or one whom it has authorized to sell it embodies the essential features of a patented invention, the effect of the sale is to terminate any right of the patent holder under patent law to control the purchaser's further disposition or use of the article itself and of articles into which it is incorporated as a component or precursor. — Excerpted from United States v. Univis Lens Co. on Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.United States v. Univis Lens Co. , 316 U.S. 241 (1942), is a decision of the|
United States Supreme Court
UNITED STATES v. UNIVIS LENS COMPANY
Argued: April April 9, 10, 1942. --- Decided: May 11, 1942
Appeals from the District Court of the United States for the Southern District of New York.
Messrs. Francis Biddle, Atty. Gen., Samuel S. Isseks, Sp. Asst. to Atty Gen., and Thurman Arnold, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the United States.
Mr. H. A. Toulmin, Jr., of Dayton, Ohio, for Univis Lens Co., Inc., et al.
Mr. Chief Justice STONE delivered the opinion of the Court.
|This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).|