The majority of the court ruled that the patent in question had been infringed upon, even though a combination patent was the only patent covering a part of a larger system that was not specifically patented. Justice Jackson dissented, disagreeing that the patent extended to all or any of the unpatentable parts.
The majority of the court ruled that the patent in question had been infringed upon, even though a combination patent was the only patent covering a part of a larger system that was not specifically patented. Justice Jackson dissented, disagreeing that the patent extended to all or any of the unpatentable parts.