Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 1.djvu/607

 HOB V. COTTBELL, 699 �tain what the application was, or that he personally made an application. �Tbe Frencb System of issuing patents is net so exact as that which prevails here. While the existence of the foreign pat- ents, confessedly with the knowledge of Marinoni, throws doubt upon his title, and whUe I am not satisfied as to the author- ship, it is impossible to say that the defendants bave estab- lished, by a preponderance of proof, the fact that Marinoni was not the sole inventor. �It is next insisted that the patent is invalid by reason of sundry irregularities and omissions during and prjor to the transit of the application through the patent office. These alleged irregularities are as follows: Marinoni appointed Messrs. "Munn, Wales and Beacb" to act as his attorneys in presenting the application, and in making "ail such altera- tions and amendments as may be required, and also to sign his name to the drawings." This autbority was never revoked by Marinoni or by Hoe. Hoe & Co., who had no record inter- est in the invention, revoked the power to Munn & Co., and ap- pointed C. A. Durgin to represent them in the promises. The specification which Marinoni had made and filed was not intelligible. Durgin amended the specification by writing substantially a new one, which was not sworn to by the inventor. It is claimed that there were no original drawings or model accompanying the description, as required by the statute, because the description was unintelligible and was not a description. �AU these alleged irregularities and omissions relate to the formai acts to be done by the inventor, or by his duly consti- tuted attomey, preparatory to and connected with the issuing of the patent. The commissioner's decision upon the fact that the acts were done, and upon the fact of the compliance of the applicant with the requirements of the statute in re- gard to his application, is not to be reviewed collaterally. For the purposes of thia case the commiBsioner's decision is final, that the drawings and the model required by the «tatute had been presented; that Durgin was the duly consti- tuted attomey of the applicant or his assignee, a,nd had ��� �