In Glue Company v. Upton, the Supreme Court of the United States was asked to decide whether a patent for a glue-making process was valid. The patentee, Upton, had invented a process for making glue from animal hides and other materials. The Glue Company had been using the process without paying royalties to Upton. Upton sued the Glue Company for infringement of his patent. The Supreme Court held that the patent was valid and that the Glue Company had infringed upon it. The Court found that the process was novel and that it was not obvious to those skilled in the art. The Court also found that the patent was not invalid because it was not sufficiently described in the patent application. The Court held that the Glue Company was liable for infringement and ordered it to pay damages to Upton. The Court also held that the patent was valid and enforceable, and that the Glue Company was not entitled to use the process without paying royalties to Upton. This case established the principle that patents are valid and enforceable, and that patent infringement is a serious matter.

In Glue Company v. Upton, the Supreme Court was asked to decide whether a patentee of an invention could recover damages for infringement that occurred prior to the issuance of his patent. The majority opinion held that he could not, as it would be unfair and unjust to allow him such recovery since there was no way for potential infringers to know about his invention before it had been patented. Justice Field dissented from this opinion, arguing that allowing a patentee such recovery is necessary in order for patents to have any value at all; otherwise inventors would be discouraged from seeking patents due their inventions being vulnerable without them. He argued further that Congress has provided protection against pre-patent infringement by enacting statutes which provide compensation even when an inventor's rights are violated before they can obtain a valid patent on their invention.