new or different res,ult from any that had been obtained before, or an old result in'a better way. There is nothing which is distinctively new in the whole, or in any, of ,the parts, in function or effect, in the complainant's patent, and it must therefore be held to be invalid.
NORTH AMERICAN IRON-WORKS tl. FISKE.
'Oircuit (Jourt, 8. D. New YO'I'k.
April 19, 1887.)
PATENTS roB INvENTIONS-INvENTION-DRINKING 'fROUGX;
, A drinking trough for animals, made with a supply-pipe, valve, and float In the interior, Mvered by a case with water, all allound it, coming from tbe bottom through openings in the case, which gi,ves free acce,ss to the water on all sides, and has the advantage of the water coming in at the bottom and in the middle, flowing upward and away from the center, involves some invention, though not of a very high order, and a patent therefor is Where defendant, in a suit for infringement, contests the validity of the patent, whichis sustained, a decree for an account,with costs, will be passed.
In Equity. Suit for infringement of letters patent. PranciJJ Forbea, for orator. ' Andrew J. Todd, for defendant. ,
WHEELER,:T. This bill is brought upon letters patent No. 816,639. dated April 28, 1885, and granted to Jonathan Moore for a drinking trough for, animals. The answers sets up severa:! prior patents, prior knowledgellnd use by want of invention, and denies infringement.. That part of thell.nswer which sets up prior patents, knowledge, and use is not supported by any evidence. The validity of the 'patent rests upon the question whether it, shows any patentable invention. ' The patent itself states that such troughs had been made of wood, with a covered, float and valve, at one end to admit and regulate the height of the water, which would prevent access to the water from all Irides, and expose the parts to injury by attempts to drink near them; anda:lso that iron troughs had been made with standing supply-pipe and overflow. The trough of the patent is made with a supply-pipe, valve, and float in the byacase with open water all around 'it.coming from the bottomtbrough openings in the case. This gives 'free, access to the water on all si<!lfs; and has the advaritages of water comingin at the bottom and in the niiqdle, flowing upward and away from ·thecenter.This to give these advantages would require some calculation and contriving peyond the skill of a' mere workman, and ipvolved some invention,ll1thoughnotofa very high order. It held to 'be sufficient in the to warrant a' paterit, and does not now appear to be, so msufficient as to render the patent void for want " , ,' , " . .' .. . oHhis foundation.
HILL 1'. HOLYOKE ENVELOPE 00.
The evidence fails to show any willful violation by the defendant of the rights secured by the patent, but does fairly show that at least one trough, which embodied the patented invention, was made and set up by his workmen before the bill was brought. The extentof the infringement is not now so important as the fact that there was some, and more to be apprehended at the commencement of the suit, to furnish grounds for it. After the suit was brought, the defendant desisted, and there is occasion f(jt:an injunction. The defendant has contested the validity of the all .the way through, and the orator has thereby been compelled to prosecute the suit to establish its right. There must therefore, upon theseconsiderations, be a decree establishing the validity of the patent, and,. for an accouIIt,with costs. . .' ,. Let a deoree be entered that the patent is valid, that the defendant bas infringe4, andfor an account, with costs. . ,
(Clwcuit Clourt.JJ. MasBachuBett8. March 10.188'7.)
l'ATlIlNTSFOB .!N\rENTIONS-PATJilNT No.9,755-lNFBINGEHENT.
Thirteenth and claims of reissued letters patent No. 9.755, dated June 14, )881, granted to Wade H.Hill, as assignee of AbramA. Rheutan. for improvements in machines 'for counting and packing envelopes, heW, not upon the evidence, as it did not appear that the infringing w.achine had ever been used by the deftmdant.
In Equity. B. F. Thurston and (hu8Um' Br0tl11l.8, fOf complainant. J.L. 8. Robert8, for defendant. .
COLT, J. . This is a suit' iII equity for infringement of reissued letters patent No. 9,755, dated June 14, 1881, granted 'to the c6rn plainant as :D.ssignee of Abram A. Rheutan, the inventor, forimprovementsin machines, for counting and packing envelopes. The origil1alpatentwas granted May 19, 1874, to Rheutan,and afterwards assigned by him to , . , the complainant. The invention of Rheutan consists in this: that no count is made on his machine unless an envelope passes. Prior to the Rheutan invention there were machines for countin!!: folded sheets of paper which counted no more sheets than actually passed through the machine. In these machines the paper, moving against fingers or cams, actuated the pawl .and ratchet counting wheel. In the Rheutan machine the folded envelope, in its movement against the fingers or cams, does not directly actuate the pawl and ratchet counting wheel, but only lifts the pawl into such a position, that it may be acted upon by a constantly moving part -of the machine.