302
1"JllDEIl.AL REPOIl.TER t vol., 48.
water orsteam:to of asphll.1tum or. bituminous rock to a consistency suitablec fo"paving,purposes, pnor to the invention of the processes desctibe(}. in these two patents, nor does it, appear that tho plication was oriethat would naturally suggest itself. to a person giving the subject consideration. The fact was that the presence of water in the bituminous ,materialduring the process of reduction was deemed to be an obstacle to itssuceessful treatment; and the care was at first to dangerous to the expel all the moisture, as its retention was and destructive to the quality of the final product. The uses of water and steam as described in these patents are therefore inventio111S in the application of prooesses to new and useful results. As both of these patentsliilveheretofore been sustained by this court, it will notbenecessllry toadd anything further th'an a reference to the decision of Judge SAWYEi in the cases of Walrath v. Pavi:'fIY Co. and Rock Go. v. Walrat.h.41 Fed., Rep. 883. Decree for ,complainant, and for an ac-
counting. ,'-"
:'1 .
et ale v. STANFOIl.l)· .-1·
(OIrcuU Court, N. D·.minoiB. November 9,189L) ... , ,-' ;','"
'-.
L 'P.A.TBtft$ YOB
"Claim 8 of letters patent' No. 245,684, issiied August 16,1881, 'to Thottlas J. Jenne and Charles S. Harmon, ,for an improvement in lifting-jacks, describes the combi· thingll, of "the stand!l>rd, A,provided with the arms. v, * * * coIlSr.O, 1:IaVlnjt the tr,uI1D10I;lB. o. in journals at of the arms, v." 'He14 that, in view of the plior state of the art, the claim is limited to the specifio eletl111UtBliamed, and is 'not iJifringedby 'a jack having a collar il1wgrsl With the and incapab,le of apy movement. ' ,, Q8Ilnot be enlarglld by coDstrl1ction.: 01' CLAIMS.,' , " '
OP OLAi:r.t-":PRIOR BTATlil O:P ART--InBINGEMENT.
II.
In Equity. Suit by Pettibone. Mulliken & Co. against Arthur L. Stanford fOl"infringerrientof patent;' dismissed. Dyrenftrrth &- Dyrenjprth, for corpplainants. Goo. Pailan and L.' t:' Band, for defendimt. GgltBH:A;lt, J. This suit is brought by the complairiants, as assignees of letters. pl1,tentNo. 245,634, granted JO Thomas J. and Charles S. fora new and of a)ifting. Harmon.,.'Aug\lst 16, previously Issued to ,., The third and Jack, infringes : only blaWif1fhich it is charged " 4. v. lng t,hl',, c"r, h. ha, VIP8;.lt,h, e tru,n,nlQns', 0, ,w',orklllfi" HI )o"lI,rnals attlw tQPS' the arms ", lIfting-bar;o; passmg thtoughthl' collar C, lever D, wOfkIng'upon the trlHluionsoaS Ulilcl'ntn. friction c6l1'ars or pawl's E
.c,
and E" ,upon the bllr H,.and clevis F, connecting theshort,arm of the lever D ,With pawl &\lblltil.ntiaUy.as desert ..
803 '1 ,This jack is desigried fur heavy weights,and especially for raili. way use. As illustrated in the drawings, and described in the specification, it comprisE',s an ironl'standardbifrircated near the upper end, its two arms standing apart to accommodate between them gripping pawls, which embrace and bitealift,ing bar. The front face ofthe standard is provided with two longitudina1flanges extending from the'base-plate, which is integral with the staridnrd, 'to the two expanding arms, which flanges serve as guides for the lifting-bar. This bar has a foot at its lower end, a nut. The jack is and is screw-threaded "at its upper end to operated under a load or object resting on the head or top of the liftingThe upper bar, as well as on the foot or, projection at its lower friction pawl is connected with the lever by means of a clevis, and the application of force to this pawl on one side causes it to bite, and raise the bar. When theleveris raised to a sufficient height, this pawl strikes the upper edge of a plate which is connected with the arms of the standardatthe rear of the 'bar,; and is thus left free to take another grip. The lower pawl dogs the lifting-bar at any desired elevation, and prevents it from dropping back. For this purpose the pawl rests on"one side upon a pll!rtofthe standardwheredt begins to bifurcate.·: ' This pawl is in close proximity to a plate<above it, 80 that,' when:the bar is raised, ,the pawl is brought into' contact' with the plate, and forced to release its bite on the bar withoutri$ing with ii. To facilitate dropping the bar, ,the lower pawl is provided, with a lip, which can be operated by the foot or hand, to cause it to release its hold: "0 is 'a collar. through which the bar passes at the upper enll of the standard,' and ,which is ptovidedwith trunnions 0 resting·· in., journals jnthe top -o( tge uprigbt arms'll. These tr,unnions IlIsO formthe:fulcrum .of the lever :p, The ,caps 12. of the jOUl;nals are fitted to the arms '0, by means of .dovetailed pr«;ljectiol)8 m, whicbfit into recesses of correspondingJorm in the upper ends, of the arlns' 'D. The caps are placed in pOSition by forcing the projections'lateraUy into the recesses from the outside. Where they are obviously held firmly in pOSition against any upward pressure. 'l'his tnethodofsecur· ing the caps is preferable to fastening them .with bolts. bothbecallse it enables the cap to resist ll .greater llpward strain, and because, it is more readily applied." The specification further says: "We prefer to flattell apart of the lower face of each trunnion 0 where It enters the journals, as shown in Fig. 7, to prevent it from turning under a '; severe strain." .The 'lifting.bar and the load are raised by operating the lever, the short end ,or socket of which is made.in two pluts, in order that the leveD may be fulcrumed on the truDllionsof the collar. The specificstionand drawings show a separate collar, with projecting trun,Ilions on opposite sides resting in recesses, called' "journals," in the top ends of the two This collar is not integral with the standard, 'and. the trunnions are confined in their bearings or journals as above described. The elements of claim 3, except "collar, 0, hlLVingtrunnions, o,;working in journals at the tops of the arms, v," are found in the prior art in substantially the same arrangement, and operating in the Same way. If
304
FlU)E:&A.L REPOnTEn ,vol.
48.
there in the ,jack. covered by the third claim which distinguishes·it'JrOin .the prior art, it is this collar, with. its trunnions con" fined journals; and serving as a fulcrum for the lever. The defendant's lifting-bar is guided in the standard as the bar is guided' in the complainant'sjack, and ,other jacks found in the prior art; but the upper guide of the defendant's bar is aelot or opening in the head of:· the standard which is formed by bringing the two arms or branohes together, thus making the guide integral with the standard, and not separate and distinct from it. The two forks or prongs of the defendant's lever embrace the topar head of the standard, and are fulcrumed 'on the protruding ends of a pin which passes through the head. This pin is; slightly in front oBheJifting-bl1r,and directly over the load, and the .center. of the base.. It is urged that this is a mere mechanical modification of the complainants' jack, andjnno sense a departure from the -invention covered ·by the, third claim.' It .is not' denied that the other claims of the patent are for a specific, construction of the combined elements,butit is urged that the claim in ,controversy is not thus llmited, Jor, the reason that it is fOfJ&,general combination of parts. In view of the language of the claim,' and,: the specification and the state of the art,.the patent is a narrow one. i ,1rhe claim embraces a collar 'of particular construction, namely" "collar,.O"having the trunnions, 0, working in jour.nals at the tops of the arms, v. "This language clearly excludes the idea, of an absolutely rigid ,union between the collar and the standard. Trunnions working in journals cannot mean trunnions rigidly united to the journals. Tbe patentees doubtless thought that, in order to make theirjaok operative, thecoHar and trunnions should be .so oonfinedin their bearings as to- have sorneplay; and the ingenUity of no can :make it appear thahi :collar with trunnions working in journals .mean!! a dollar integral wit'Q the standard, and ihcapa,ble of any movement.. The expert, in effect, the claim words, which are not at all.ambiguous, but have a clear and distinct application,and imports int;() it language which is unwarranted by thespecification. . He even . goes so far as to say that the statement that the trunnions work in their bearings is a mistake. The specification and drawings show just how the collar and trunnions, which may be easily :removed) rare held in place, not rigidly, but "firmly against any up,watdpressure;" Jenne and Harmon were mereimprovers, and the thing claimed is limited to the particular elements of the combination. ,A 'jackwhieh .does not contain a collar at the top {lapable of some move·nientin its bellrings:does .notinfringe the claim in controversy, and we have seen that the collar or upper guide of the defendant's jack is in:tegr.al, 'with, tbestandard,and. incapable of any play or movement whatlanguage ofthe claimis explicit and clear,and the court is ndtat :Hberty to ..enlarge. it !beyond its. plainscopej·l1or. 'Can the com.plainants, be allowed to: show by experts that the invention is broader ·thanrthe,termaofthe :claim. :' TbebiU is dismissed for want of equity. i
,,";
:j
HAMMOND BUC.,'KLECO· .,. HATHAWAY.
305
HAMMOND Buc.,'KLE CO.
v.
HATHAWAY
et aZ.,1
(Circutt Court, D. Connecticut. December 1, 1891.)
L
PATENTS 'POR INVEN',l'JON-I'ATENTABJLITY-CLA.8PS AND BUCKLES.
L' $AJh::dEXTJ!:NTOP STATE 'OF ART. . . In letters patent No. 301,884, granted JUly 15, 188" to· the. Same persons, for.an improvement in similar buckles, the .tongue-plate was a single piece of metal, , ·. , .' f itself, and forked at its relU'i end next the catch-plate. The toiigue 8wnng:in this bifurcation, Us pivot being located underneath the tongue-plate·. Into',. under-fold of the tongue-plate partially. embraced· the ends of Which was beld betiyeen the, The object of this 'construction .""sto canse the or a portion of it, to extend rearWard 'of the tongue, g s.u.rfa.ce.for the cat.G.h.-P late. The firstc.laim was: ".In.co.m form.mg,there B b.eari.n . . bina,tioD" the plate, thll tongue pivoteP directly to the' and tlle 'tongue-plate rllarward of the pivot and in contact wlth the catch-plate When ·the parts are engaged. tI. Beld that, as the claim was merely for an improved , olasprwhich had manypredeoessors, it must be so limited that the tllngue should be only 'pivoted directly to the. tongue-plate, but below its face, and between its bifurcated ends. o
Letters patent No. 251,246. granted December 20, 1881, to Theodore E. King and Joseph H1Lmmond, Jr., are for an improvement in glove-fasteners, shoe-buckles, and.siplVar articles,·:which consist of a tongue-plate, a tongue or lever pivoted to t1,le and a slotted catch-plate, with which the tongue can be engaged, and' lii which the two parts of the buckle are drawn together and securely fastened. The iplprovementconsisted 1n dispensing with the spring element usually found in pre-exiBting devices, which operated on the tongue, and held it in anopen or closed position'. Held, that this patent is void; for letters patent granted November 9, l88O.to CharlesF. Littlejohn, were for.t.he same device as applied to carriage boot,flaRiI; .aM it involved no.invention to apply it to wearing appareL
8.
S.uPi1-lNFRINGEMENT"':BpCKLEIJ.
Thi'llllatent is infringed by a bucklewhtch is composed of two plates riveted together, the lower being. provided with projections in whiCh the pivots of the turn, and which fit into openings in the upper plate when the two lie tOll'etheri and the upper and spring-plate being bifurcated, and extending on both sides 01 the rearward, to affor!! a bearing. surface for catch-plate, IOW6!-" plate'has no such exteusion.
.
In Equity. On final hearing. W. Hey, for plaintiff. Frederick P. Fiih, for defendants. SHIPMAN, J. This ill a bill in equity, based upon the alleged infringement of three letters patent,-No. 251,246, dated December 20, 1881, for a glove-fastener; No. 301,884, dated July 15,1884, for a shoe-clasp, each of.said patents having been issued to Theodore E. King and Joseph Jr.; and No. 341,422, dated May 4, 1886. The complainl;tnt submitted to a dismissal of its bill so far as the third patent is concerned. No. 251,246 is for an improvement in glove-fasteners-, Shoe-buckles, and ai,milar articles, which consist of a tongue-plate, a tongue or lever . pivc:>ted to the tongue-plate, and a slotted catch-plate, with which the tongue can be engaged, and by which the two parts of the buckle are drawn. together and securely fastened. The improvement consisted in dispensing' with the spring element, which usually. found in preexistiIlg devices, and whiph was generally by some kind of a . which operated upon the tongue, and held it in open or closed position, like the spring that acts on the billde oia pocket-knife,
lRehearing denied, 48 Fed. Rep. lllI4
v.48F.no.4-20