This case was a companion case to
Graham v. John Deere, decided on the same day. The United States sought review of a judgment of the
Court of Claims, holding valid and infringed a patent on a
wet battery issued to Adams. The suit was brought by Adams and others holding an interest in the patent against the Government charging the Government with infringement and breach of an implied contract. The Government challenged the validity of the patent and denied that it had been infringed or that any contract for its use had ever existed. The
Trial Commissioner held that the patent was valid and infringed in part but that no contract, express or implied, had been established. The United States sought
certiorari on the patent validity issue only. The patent under consideration, U.S. No. 2,322,210, relates to a nonrechargeable electrical battery composed of two electrodes - one of magnesium and the other of cuprous chloride, with a plain or salt water electrolyte. The specifications of the patent states that the object of the invention is to provide constant voltage and current without the use of acids and without the generation of dangerous fumes. Another object was to provide a battery which may be manufactured and distributed in a dry condition and rendered serviceable by filling the container with water. Adams did not, however, claim this important distinguishing factor of his invention. For several years prior to filing, Adams worked in his home experimenting on the development of a wet battery. He found that when cuprous chloride and magnesium were used in either plain water or salt water, an improved battery resulted. Less than a month after filing, Adams brought his discovery to the attention of the Army and Navy. Arrangements were made for demonstrations before experts of the
United States Army Signal Corps. The Signal Corps scientists did not believe the battery was workable. In particular, a government expert with the National Bureau of Standards felt that Adams was making unusually large claims that were not convincing. Later, the Government entered into contracts with various manufacturers to produce the battery and did not notify or seek permission from Adams. The basic idea of chemical generation of electricity was old, tracing back to the epic discovery by Italian scientist
Alessandro Volta in 1795, who found that when two dissimilar metals are placed in an electrically conductive fluid an
electromotive force is set up and electricity generated. The basic elements of a chemical battery are a pair of electrodes of different electrochemical properties and a liquid or
moist paste electrolyte. Various materials may be employed as electrodes, various electrolyte are possible and many combinations of these elements have been the object of considerable experimentation. The United States challenged the validity of the Adams patent on the ground of lack of novelty as well as
obviousness. The Government argued that
wet batteries comprising a zinc anode and silver chloride cathode were old in the art; and that the prior art showed that magnesium could be substituted for zinc and
cuprous chloride for
silver chloride. == Opinion of the Court ==