deemed ,to be It mere equivalent to the method used by complainant, and in effect hie combination patent would thus be enlarged so as to cover almost the. entire field of applying heat to nut-trl\ys. Complain,. ant's patent in this particular. in fact covers very narrow ground, and covers only the use of the waste heat ffom the boilers and burners, ap,plied in the method described; and, as defendants' machine does not use this waste heat for the purpose named, H cannot be held to be an infringement upon complainant's patent. The bill must therefore be dismissed, at cost of complainant.
UNITED STATE;S METALLIC PACKING
Co. v. TRIPP.
(Oircuit Oourt, D. MaaaaohU8ettB. JuneH, 1887.)
PATENTS FOR. INVENTIONs-IMPROVEMENTS IN MENT. . . PACKING-INFRINGE-
In 1882 an injunction was granted, and final decree made, restraining the defendant, Thomas Tripp, from infringing reissued letters .patent No. 9,865, granted August 81, 1880, to Martin. Schneble, for improv.ements in Piston.,rod packing. The packing made by defendant, when so restrained, had two disks placed at the head of the stuffing-box, one with a concave recess, and the other with a convex projection which fitted into the recess. By means of this arrangement, the packing was cafable of a rocking or oscillating movement, and could so accommodate itsel to a bent piston or to a rod not set parallel with the axis of the steam cylinder. ,The defendant afterwards made packing with a changed form of disks, one having a coniC.al projection, and the other a beveled edge fitting over the projection. The result was the same in producing a rocking or oscillating movement, although imperfectly. Held, that the change was colorable only, and that an injunction should be granted to restrain such manufacture.
In Equity. Browne & Browne, for complainant. O. O. Morgan; for defendant. ,
COLT, J. This is a motion for a .preliminary injunction to restrain the defendant· from infringing reissued letters patent No. 9,365, granted August 31, 1880, to Martin Schneble, for improvements in piston-rod packing. In 1881 the assignor of the plaintiff corporation, and having the same name, brought a bill in equity for an infringement of this patent against the present defendant the Hancock Inspirator Company. To this bill the defendant, Tripp, filed an answer, denying infringement, denying the novelty of the patented invention, and denying that the reissue was for the same invention as the original patent. In January, 1882. a final detlree was entered by consent for nominal damages, and without costs, and for an injunction restraining the defendants from mak. ing, using, or selling any metallic packing infringing the reissued patent. Upon this state of facts, it is not open to the defendant on the present motion to deny the validity of the Schneble patent. The only
question properly before the court at the present hearing is whether the piston-rod packing which the defendant now makes is substantially the same as that which he has been enjoined by this court from making. The former packing made by'the defendant had two disks placed at the head of the stuffing-box, one with a concave recess, and the other with a convex projection which fitted into the recess. By this means the packing was capable ,of a rocking or oscillating movement, and so could accommodate itself toa bent piston or to a rod not set parallel with the axis of the steam cylinder. In the piston packing the defendant now makes, he has changed the form of the disks. He has one disk. with So conical projection, and the other disk with a beveled edge which fits over the projection. The result is the same, namely, a rocking or oscillating.' movement, though it is a more imperfect device than the other. Irne form is different, but the things are substantially the same. It is So mere colorable change, and therefore cannot relieve the defendant. The Qlotion for an injunction should be granted, and it is so ordered.
THE FULDA. STEWART
(DiltNct OQu'!'t, 8. D. New Yo'!'k.
May 23, 1887.)
Tugs'accustomed to do business in private slips are chargeable with notice of the customs of tlle occupants, as respects breasting off, and the use of warps across the slip.
The steamer F., on arrival at her slip at Jersey City after dark, was sought to be breasted off, as usual, some 25 feet from the wharf, the wind and tide being against her. A warp or ,hawser was thrown across tlle slip, 100 feet from itljlentrance, to aid in the work, as usual, under such difficultIes. A tug having business in the slip, shortly after, on entering at considerable speed, ran against this hawser,anll carrIed away her. pilot-house and 'smoke-stack. Held, t1;lat the steamer, in using a warp after dark, was bound to provide rea· sonable notice of the oDstruction to other vessels having business there, and likely to come there; that the partial lighting up of the slip by the ship's lights, without any other signal or precaution, was. insufficient. Held, alBo, that the tug ws;s chargeable with knowledge of the usages of the slip, and was bound to approach it with more caution than she used; and the damages were divided.
In·Admiralty. Hyland & Zabriskie, for libelant. Ship11lXJ,rt, .;Barlow, Larocque & Ohoate, for claimant. BROWN, J. ' On the fourth of December, 1886, after dark, between 7 and 8 P. M., as the steam-tug D. Bingham was entering the slip of the Bremen line at Jersey City. in order to take a canal-boat loaded with coal from the to and along-side the Fulda, for the purpose of coal..