(DOWNLOAD) "Johnston Formation Testing Corp. v. Halliburton" by Fifth Circuit Circuit Court Of Appeals ~ Book PDF Kindle ePub Free
eBook details
- Title: Johnston Formation Testing Corp. v. Halliburton
- Author : Fifth Circuit Circuit Court Of Appeals
- Release Date : January 09, 1937
- Genre: Law,Books,Professional & Technical,
- Pages : * pages
- Size : 67 KB
Description
Erle P. Halliburton and Halliburton Well Cementing Company sued Johnston Formation Testing Corporation and E. C. Johnston for infringement of patent No. 1,930,987, which was applied for by John T. Simmons, alleged inventor, February 10, 1926, but not granted till October 17, 1933. Simmons before applying for the patent assigned an interest to Henderson, but within three months after the application was filed they had assigned first partially and then wholly to Halliburton. The patent covers a method and an apparatus for testing the productivity of formations encountered in drilling oil and other deep wells. The defendants also have patents, granted while the Simmons patent was pending in the Patent Office, under which the alleged infringing apparatus has been used and operations conducted. We read in the proceedings in the Patent Office the statement of Halliburton that twenty patents had been granted in this particular testing art while the Simmons patent was pending, which makes apparent the great activity at this period. It appears in the record that both Halliburton and Johnston and their companies make thousands of these deep well tests and no doubt there are others making them also. Evidently, since Halliburton claims all others to be infringers of the Simmons patent, the monopoly contended for would if established very seriously affect many persons and businesses. In Edwards v. Johnston Formation Testing Corporation (D.C.) 44 F.2d 607, affirmed (C.C.A.) 56 F.2d 49, the present defendants were sued by Edwards, the patentee in No. 1,514,585 issued November 4 1924, and therefore antedating the Simmons application some fifteen months. The holding was that neither Edwards nor Johnston were pioneers in the well testing art, that Edwards had not a basic patent, but was only an improver, and his monopoly was limited to his improvement. It is now claimed that the Simmons invention is basic at least in the employment of a single string of pipe to make the test, and in trapping in it an uncontaminated sample from the bottom of the well.