Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 9.djvu/411

 396 FEDERAL REPORTER. �thereof, as and for the purpose described, (5) In combination, the case for containing the match, the nose-piece, the roller for moving the match, and the igniter, or the equivalents for them. as and for the purpose described." �1. It is provided, by section 4895 of the Revised Statutes, that "patents may be granted and issued or reissued to the assignee of the inventer or discoverer, but the assignment must first be entered of record in the patent-office." Selden was the fourth assignee in succession of the entire interest in the original patent, and was not the immediate assignee of the inventors. The defendant contends that the word "assignee," in the statute, means the immediate assignee, and not the ultimate assignee, and that reissues Nos. 7,927 and 8,490 were invalid because they were granted to Selden, and he was not the immediate assignee of the inventors. This is not the proper construction of the statute. The "assignee" means the as- signee in any degree and however remote. By section 4884 the grant is directed to be made to "the patentee, his heirs or assigns." This is not limited to the first assignee. So section 4898, in declaring that "every patent, or any interest therein, shall be assignable," and that "the patentee or. his assigns" may convey an exclusive right under the patent for the whole or any specified part of the United States, clearly means that an assignee in any degree is an assignee for all purposes. Ail parts of the statute are to be construed harmoniously in this respect, as there appears to be no good reason for a contrary con- struction. It is true that section 4 of the patent act of February 21, 1793, (1 St. at Large, 322,) used the words "assignees of assigns to any degree;" but the absence of the w:ords "to any degree" cannot, in view of all the provisions of the present statute, be regarded as restricting the meaning of the word "assignee." �2. It is also provided by section 4895 that, "in all cases of an appli- cation for a reissue of any patent, the application must be made and the corrected specification signed by the inventer or discoverer, if he is living, unless the patent was issued and the assignment made before the eighth day of July, 1870." The applications for reissue, which resulted in reissues Nos. 7,927 and 8,490, were made, and the corrected specifications were signed, by Selden, and not by Tyler, Chandler, and Standish, and it was not shown that they were not living. It is contended that for this reason those reissues are void. It is claimed that this case is not within the exception in the statute, because, although No. 50,860 was granted before July 8, 1870, the assignment to Selden was not made until September, 1877. But it ��� �