The phrase "assignor of" is correct and usable in written English.
It is typically used in legal or contractual contexts to refer to a person or entity that transfers rights or obligations to another party.
Example: "The assignor of the contract must ensure that all terms are met before the transfer is finalized."
Alternatives: "transferor of" or "grantor of".
Nor can the assignor of an expired patent, when the assignee seeks to hold him to his bargain, invoke the law condemning contracts in restraint of trade.
40, related to protection of assignor of life insurance policy, enforcement of storage liens, and penalties, prior to the general amendment of this Act by Pub.
In this patent infringement suit the question is whether the assignor of a patent is estopped by virtue of his assignment to defend a suit for infringement of the assigned patent on the ground that the alleged infringing device is that of a prior art, expired patent.
117, 119, 69 L.Ed. 316, is 'that an assignor of a patent right is estopped to attack the utility, novelty or validity of a patented invention which he has assigned or granted as against any one claiming the right under his assignment or grant.' The fact that the prior art is evidenced by an expired patent does not seem significant to him.
It is also certain, when the facts stated in the petition presented to the legislature of North Carolina by the assignor of the state of South Dakota are recalled, that but for this vast reduction of the debt produced by the determination of the state of North Carolina, the alleged security now sought to be realized upon by the state of South Dakota would be of no value.
The judgment is affirmed for the reason that we find that the application of the doctrine of estoppel so as to foreclose the assignor of a patent from asserting the right to make use of the prior art invention of an expired patent, which anticipates that of the assigned patent, is inconsistent with the patent laws which dedicate to public use the invention of an expired patent.
There is neither finding of fact nor averment in the pleadings on either point as to any other assignors of plaintiff than Williams.
Taken literally, the 'proceeds' provision could have been read to mean that a 'protected' assignee would have priority even over a creditor of the assignor to whom proceeds of assigned accounts had been paid over in ordinary course of business — a result which would go beyond need or reason.
The Court of Appeals reversed, 147 F.2d 608, holding that the prior art may be resorted to by the assignor to measure the extent of anticipation for the purpose of limiting the claims of the assigned patent, and thus avoid infringement.
It is urged that the permission thus given to respondent assignor to show want of novelty which he is estopped to deny, is to disregard the estoppel by which, by hypothesis, he is bound.
no purchaser from the assignor, no creditor of any kind of the assignor, and no prior or subsequent assignee or transferee of the assignor..
