18.'pp,ly ,it" fotpreventing' the' resinous· boating of felt, Of ·}jb,rfromadhering. , It follows ul1less the process ofithe pateritiil"..
volvesl3bmething more than the use'i1fsimple water to moiste,nthe roll..
1lrs. and,pre,'ent the adhesiOllofthe'paint, it is desiituteof patentable
!lovelty. "The process consists, according to the language of the claim, iIi appl;ying "a paint-repelling compbund " to- the rollers'. 'This hardly describes'water, and neither thaMetmnor the term "liquid solution"is an apt term' to describe it. Ifthepllioooteeshad contemplated the use of water, there is no reason why,they should not have said so; and, if they haal, it is not improbable that they would not have obtained a patent. The, claim must be construed as specifying the application of 80meother'compound or solution ,thlin water to the rollers. Upon this .con&tl1ootibn of the patent,'the defetHlant does not itlfri'nge;, . The proofs show that for a short time the defeiWfaritemployed in itflfabtory the parat,U$,and,proces8 of the patent, :using oil or water, WIth other liquids, :upon a, SIngle roller, as a paiilt..repellingcompound. 'The infringement ,was 'very inconsiderable, a_nd was 'witbout any profit to tile defendant, or substantial injury to the com plainant, and is not of sufficient consequepce to the basis of '&J Aecree Jor,an accounting or an injunction. It suftices, however, to lead toa ,dismissal of the biU;without costs.
" ", I "
et al. v.
Oourt, N. D. NewYor'k, December 23,1ll89.)
i, The second claim of Stetsoll1s patell.lihas all the partS 0'1 the first, except that' tllerl1 is 119 spring in the detlecting plll<teto release the globe.: ,Held, that it was tic1pated llY, the Ford and Betts patents. " ,; , " ' . 8" ' , lanteJ:]ldi:l!ers from: ,that ,of Stetson's tlrst claim only in tbat the · 'vertical rdd,s the two platell Ina\1e in two parts, 80 that, they can be discllnnectedatll point midway between the two plates; Held an infringement.
bled deVice,s adapted to "tubular lanterns," for detaching the glass globe of alaI/.tern ftom with those whereby the globe is raised and lowered integrallf with the detlllcting plate and perforated, plate, and steadied laterally, has a vertically adjustable detlecting plate, above' thelflobe, carrying a spring attached to it, adapted to hOld or release the globe; connecting rods, which'extend from the deflecting plate to the perforated plate beneath the globe, and unite them rigidly, for the purpose of holdlllg the two plates and the globe integrally together when the globe il raised from the lamp; and gnides,'whioh are rigiuly attached to the perforated plate, and embrace the aides Qt"the frame, for the pUrpose of steadying the plates and globe when raised and'lowEll.'e!l·. Irwin's patent, dateaMay 23. 1871, allows the,globe to be detached by a' sp1!ing attached to the detlecting' plate, but not to be raised above the lamp, anql the plates become separated. Ford's patent', dated JUly 25, 1871. allows'the g16b6 to be raised integrally with the plates above tl;lelamp,bymeans of rods, but:the globe cannot be removed from the frame. Betts/,patent, dated Augl1st26" 1879,ha.s similar guidllSfa1' Jlateral support. Coll,my's patent, dated February 12, 1878, allows the glqbe pe,li'aised,integrally with the 'plates by wirescarried'by the perforated plate and hooking into the detlectiI/-g ,l'!l;Ite.; .lI.lld by unhooking thllwires, the globe can "be removed 'from the frame,but'thetwo' plates become detached from each other. ,Held, that tge,claim of StetaonwaS 'notantic1pated by aliy'of;these patents, and that the lmprovements involved, invention.,
STEAM-GAUGE & LANTERN 00.
In Equity. E. S. Jenney, for complainants·. . GeOTge H. Lothrop and Wells W. Leggett, for defendants.
WALLACli1, J. This suHis brought upon letters patent granted to Joseph B. Stetson, assignor, No. 244,944, dated July 26, 1881, for a lantern. The complainants, as owners of this patent, allege that the defendants infringe it by the sale of lanterns manufactured by the Buhl Company, of Detroit.. The only claims in controversy are the first. and' second. These claims are as follows: . . .:
"(1) In alantern having'a frame, the vertically adjusta· ble pillte, C, carrying a spring, E, adapted to hold or release thegJobe, as de-, sired. in combination with the globe, perforated plate on which it rests, the connecting rods, F F, serving to unite the toP. and bottom pllites: and auitable guides adapted to give lateral support to the lower part of the globe. Ilubstantially as set fortb.(2) The tubular frame, D D'. and the globe. G, in comblnl\tion with the plates,C p, the connectingroos, F, lind ,the ;guidesj, wberebYllaid glO;be iSl'afs.ed and lowered by a suitablelever. and lIWsllied laterallr in its .Ill\>vements, for the purpose set f o r t h . , " , i
The defendants· insIst that the two claims in controversy are invalid; novelty; and,also, that, if the claims are given for "'ant of the interpretil.tion.they should receive, in view of thepriot state of the art. they are not infringed by the lantern sold by them. THese claims were considered by Judge NELSON in a suit in the circuit' court for the district of Massachusetts, (Lantern 00. v. Roglrr8, 29 Fed. Rep. 453,) and their novelty was sustained. Several prior patents, which were not 'commented upon in the opinion in that case, and apparently were not before the cotlrt,havebeeb. introduced by the defendants; and are relied!upon by them as important.. Among these are the patent to Shannon of September 23,1856, and the patent to Balch of August 29,' .. In view of these patents, and of some others, which wete not: b(lfore the cOurt in the former case, it has seemed necessary to consider the, questions presented by the defense de novo. The improvements the sQqject oUhe patentare more especially adapted to the class oflanterns which are commonly known as "tubular lanterns." Such lanterns have iSi ftame,'cousisting of tubulal' supports, extending upwards, from the base of the on opposite sides of the globe, and across the top of ,tile' globe; and the globe rests upon a perforated plate, through which air is ltdmitted into the globe, aridisiheld in place by pressure downward'u!,lon its top ofa spring clasp or an annular holder attached to a deflecting plate.. The deflecting plate is rigidly or so as to be vertically adjustable, to the tubular' frame. One form of such lanterns is soown' in the to Irwin of May 23,1871, and another: in the patent to Ford ofJuly 25,1871. In lanterns likelrwin's, the globe is removed;by actuatfngithe spring clasp attached to the deflecting plate, and, when detached from :theperforated plate as well as the defiectJ ing plate; .and ill those like Ford's the deflecting plate and perforatea plate;are:rigidly connected with the glQl;>e, and the globe can be raised
above the lamp by raising the deflecting plate. In the .Irwin class the glol:>e can be removed from the frame of the lantern,but only by detaching the several partsr and 'it cannot lifted above the lamp; and in the Ford class it cannot be removed from the frame, but can be lifted, with ?ther parts, integrally above the lamp, and lowered again. "It is uesihible to unite in the same lantern devices which will permit the globe to be removed, arId also to be raised and lowered integrally with the perplale,without being removed from the frame. A globe that can })eremOVedCf\ll be more conveniently cleaned, and can be readily replaced' when bl:6ken,while one that can be raised and lowered admits of the more, convenient lighting and trimming of the lamp; and when the :glo'he unless the perforated plato remains attached to the, it is liable to fall away from the'lamp, and has to be rephwe,d: 'if it gets injured or lost, as, II).!l>Y sometimes, happen. I t is also desirable. that when the globe of thelantern is raised and lowered the plate be maintained in sach a relation ofpanallelism to the sidesofthe }frame that 'when lowered it will resume its normal position with'Qcou!racy;because otherwise the mouth of the lamp is liable to become injured in returning the perforated plate to its The lantern ?'rthe,lIDffiplainallts' patent unitesthe,se devices. has been effected py chapges in details ofconstruction ,19 the deviceafound in one or the ptheroftpe of Ford and, by adding some further yices. Tb,especification states that the new parts added" are 1:>Y lines in, the figures." These lines show connecthold the deflecting plate, and either the perforated plate 9T glqbe, in u, rigid cOnnection with it, and guides which are rigidly atttiPb,ed19 ,the perforated plate, and embrllce the tubplar sidesQf the lantern -fiame,. The patentee says, in the epecificatlon: , "I extend wires, F F. or other suitable'connections, down from the disk, C; (the detle,ctin,g.,plate,',) to lowel,' par:t, li>t,the globe, G, which t,hey enC"irc,Ie, as inllicated in Fig. I .unite these wires, as shown in Fig. 1, to lateral extensions, or \vings, P, of, the perforat:ed plate, P, so that said plate shall inove, witil tlie' globe, up and down.. r also provide lateral guides, H h, to give a steadyrnovement, and to hold the globe firmly when in position for use. Such guides ,are preferably of wire,;' secured to the perforated plate or to,its Wings, P, and passing around the air-tube, D. '" '" ... It is obvious that vertical rods passing through P. would fOI;m suitable guides, ,or that might enter grooves, in the inner faces o( the tubes, D,D., for this, ", . . .: The is for a lantern which,besides the globe and the sup"': porting .franie, has (1) the vertically tidjustable deflecting plate, carry'; inga spring attached to it, adapted to,hold or release the globe; (2) con'necting rods which' extend from the deflectinK plate to the perforated plate, and unitl:\ them rigidly; and, (3)guides which are rigidly attached to the perfQratedplate, alldembrace the sides of the frame, or move in grooves in tbellides, or consist of loops on the sides, to receive the con· necting rods.· The office of the connecting rods is to hold the globe, the deflecting plate, and the perforated plate integrally together when the globe: i$,fl,tised from the lamp. The ,office of the guides is to steady
these parts laterally in their upward and" oownward' movements. This claim is for the assembled devices which contribute to the detachabilitv of the globe from the lantern frame with those whereby it is raised and lowerpd integrally with the deflecting plate and perfol'ated plate, and steadied laterally. ,The lantern of the second claim is a tubular lantern, having the same connecting rods, guides which embrace the tubular sides, and the vertically adjustable deflecting plate, but having no spring in the deflecting plate to release the globe. This claim is for a nation 6f those devices, only, whereby the globe is raised and lowered integrally.with the defiectingplate andthErperforated plate, and steadied laterally during the operation. The first claim is not anticipated by any of the prior patents, and, with some hesitation, the conclusion is reached tha:t the improvements included in it involved inventiun, arid 'were something more than the aggregation together of old their adaptation to each other, by the ordinary skill of the mechanic,,' . An examination of the patents of Irwin and Ford ,show that w,fm:b Stetson.really did was to assemble togethel' the devices found in one Of the of these lantllrns, add' the guides,and reorganize the parts gO that efficiently reinfol'C1;l each other ill their new associatiOtI'. The reil question in the case is whether this was such an obvious thIng to do that it was not invention: stetson was not the first to Perceive the advantages whichw()Uld enSj1e by embodying the removable gl1Qbe of Irwil18ndthe adjustable globe or Ford in a lantern. of the eraltype. This appears by the patent to Colony of February 12, 1878'j apd the l&ntern of this patent is the nearest advance to that of StetS6!:i' shown by any of the prior patents in the record. That lantern has,ll. vertically adjustable deflecting plate, and wires carried by the perforated plate, ,wbil;lh measurably perform the work of the spring and the necting rodllof Stetson. These wires extend. one on each side globe; to a ring attached to the deflecting plate, ends hook over the ring so that the perforated plate, the globe, and'tbe defl:eetin,.gplate'can be raised and lowered integrally,aI.ld by unhooking the the,globe can be removed from the frame.. In this hoW'evElr, when the globe is removed, the deflecting plate and the Jletare detached from each other. The wires are not rods rigidly COllllectectwith the two plates. There are no guides jn thisls:#tern jund probably incorrect to treat the wires extending from th,\) perforated'plate' as springs. More accurately, they' are hooks j and they perforrpnoother function than those. performed by the hooks shown in the lantern of the patent to Balc1) of August 29, 1871. Practically, the lantern of Colony is but a slight 'improvement upon the lanterh'of Balch, aJthough in the lantern of Balch the globe cannot be removed from the frame except integrally with the perforated plate. No oQe.iih .comparii;lg this lantern with the Lmtern of Stetson would doubtlfPra moment that the latter isa more efficient and convenient one, andth3:t there ure esaentia:I differences in the organization oithe parts that"are common to b9th. . . . " ,
" ,Turningnowtothe several. elements. oltha e1aim,·it while of thelll"axe not shown separatelyin any of :the priqf .T,p.e vertically 8.:9j1,lstapleplate, but differing someof w:as ,()ld, as is ,shown Py the patent to to Balch,: an.d the: to Colony; but none of these a pl/lte .spring . hold or release the tlflqJ:>eof the \lnless the, wire, hooks of Colony are treated as l\ond,if tl:!ey are springs, they are carried by plate of. :the deflecting plate., Cppnllcting to unite the and plp-te, in the lantern pC the patent are showq Ji,n, patent ¥> fJi'ord;' and I, I instead. of J:>eing connected plate, they are ring, g,uides give lat:e,ral.BljII/pqr,t thel()wer part of the..globe in-the patent to B .. ·. Au. 26.. bu.t. t,heY.11e;>l1ot. p.,.por.t, fF. t.fi.. .. i . h.t.heir.a!,te;>, perforated plate; III one struepatent; it to of i ll;the intp. ;vertically tqe chllnges.lDaqein.tPe .defl tsimp,le ,npw·· gave it a new f.u .... . . l,\ deta.qh .. .. . ;h.. iC. h ill,9.fP,.rill?f3.. r.ac.ti ....·. va.l?,e. . .. tqqse ;was, .to..make. ; the, J.P.!?" their w,or'\t, i 'In histqry j. pne of the ;QWJ?ftf· lind ,,1lE1n. pa;;ent was l?J,'pqgllR tlle .iThey obtli-lTled ftie .p.o,,*%Rf..t.He.pateP.h . cOtl.lm.epce4. m . . ....a.kil,lg,the . lan· . ·. .i ntro.d.u.ce.dit .. Tile! lmljl( to the ,su pi; t1W old.f?!ll',ls.?f :'fqe: that .tAappro/l-Jld .,.jP:lng PaY, :the, ?f .litiglj#Op realdef.l;lpdlUlts In tl1,iscase,::Ule . of. th,e sold by #1.., ,1.ng I '.' by,some ,n.,e,W d.e. .. .on. the Ia . .n 8.. rot:.; lJ:win :an.d Jor im,[I'be jthe first claim,of r q\lnP.ltctlpg rogs p'ltte. t,,,o .so ,that ;thexr d:weponected,. &t8; pOInt ; two . »nlW the tWQ '. ·. iJ;l.a fWmi ! ' "".j
p,dI:l1tjg,n; useful, was not invention. Tneir office and ill. that of the lantern of the patent to Betts. It is doubtful wnether they
contribute anything' t()' lifting of thidlu1tern which' ts b()t equally well accornplished by the 190PS il1 the lantetns of Colony; Foi'di IIlovementof the deflecting plate and Balch, which control the in those lanterns. The patent to Shannon, and the other patents relied upon by the defendants which were not in the case before JudgeNE'LSON, have not been specifically referred to, with the e,xception of the patent to Balch, because they do not seem to be of any value in considering the questions :which discussed. , Vpon filing proper disclaime,rof the secondclltim. a decree may be entered by the complainant, without costs, for an .junptioll and an accounting.
SUN VAPOR STRElilT-LIGHT (Oircuof,t L' PA.TlI:NTS joOR
WITH OIL. ' ,','
fl. WESTERN STREET-LIGHT
D. Iowa, E. D. January 8, 1800.)
FQR SUPPLYING BTREET.L.Ufi.I :
The lI.rst claim of letters patent Nil' 222,856, issued December 23, 1879, to ,HeDJ'J! B. Belden, for a method of supplying litreet-Iamps with oil, consisting in providl\1gthe lamp. with removable reservoirs of a' number greater than the lamps, and provtati1g. transporting flll.ad aD:d for ones,ls not mfnnged by a deVlce for transportmg filled reservOlrs, and'substituting themf.or the emptied ones, which does not use the case or rack forcl)ateYing the resel'\"Oirs descri1;led in the Belden patent. , ' ,
2. 8,urE':-'OIL RESER!'OIR. " , " ' , 'The second claIm of letters patent No. 286,211, issued October 9,1888, to Alfred an oil reserJIoir, bavingits bottom set in to form a flange to, fit ovel' and upon II, suitable tank lWapted for permanent c()nnection to the service piP,e pf a, laillpi said' 'bottom having an opening provided with asorew-cap, and air and teed' connected thereto, is not by a device which does not co.mbine a screw-cap with the feed and air pipes, and which does not use a second pipe as a, feed-pIpe, the patent being limited to the entire combination, none of its elements beingllew. ' ,
I ' ,
In 'Equity. Cha,·les If.. ¥'I11er, for complainant. Hen,der«m, Hurd. DaniRl,s KieBel, for defendant·
. SHJRAS,J. The complainant company is the owner by assignment< of letters patent No. 222,856, issued on the23d of December,' 1879, to' Henry So: Belden, and ofletters patent No. 286,211, issued to AlfrediL.: Mack under date of October 9, 1883, and in the bill herein filedaversi that the defendant is infringing the first Claim of the letters patent to Belden, and the second and third claims of those issued to Mack. The: first of the plltent is in these words:
"Tbe herein descrlbedrnetbod 01' system street-lamps with oil. ' consiHting in providing lamps, with reservoirs of a DumlJergreater tban:the numuer of lamps, and proViding 81so acoDveyance adapted to trans-' potti and. by means of these devices, reto'()ving tbe PD),Pf,y res-' ervoiJ:s and l'eplacing tbem with filled ones, substantially as set forth.',,:,· . "