patent, continuous and uninterrupted, the United States patent does not expire before the end of the 15-years duration of the Canadian patent, although the Canadian patent, before the expirationof the first five years, may have lapsed or become forfeited by the non-observance of a condition subsequent, or by the happening of a subsequent condition, prescribei by the statute of Canada. If the Canadian government has in fact accepted the renewal fee, and renewed the patent for a continuous and uninterrupted period of 15 years, as though the subsequent conditions had been complied with. the United States patent has not expired hefore the expiration of said 15 years. I am confirmed in the construction which I have given by the hardship of a construction which should compel the life of United Statespateuts to be determined by the operation of conditions subsequent in prior foreign patents which may secretly affect, or be claimed to affect,. the life of such foreign patents, although . they are apparently, upon their face, in full and have apparently :been uninterruptedly continued in existence by the. government which ,granted; t h e m . , InNo.,656 the dates of the respective patents differ from those in No. 655. The plea in No. 656 sets up, mutatis mutandis, have been heretofore stated, omitting those in regard to the Swedish patent. 1. understand the facts to be substantially those of the PohlGue, . except tha,tin the plea the conditions sUbsequent are alleged to be stated upon the face of the Canadian patent. I do not regard this as a vital difference. The pleas are ollerruled, and the defendant will answedn 30 days.
(p(rcuit Oourt, E.D.· MiSSOUri, E. D. October 80, 1889.)
.L P A':"ENTB .FOR INVENTIONS-PATENTABILITy-UTILITY-PRESUMPTION. . In the abllllnce of satisfactory evidence to tbe contrary, the subject-matter of every patent is presumed to be useful. and patentable. . 2. SA.ME-INFRINGEMENT-ORNA.MENTAL CEILINGS. . Letters patent No. 861,438, granted April 19, 1887, to Mesker & Bro., for an improvement in sheet-metal ceilings, walls, or panels, valid, and infrI.llged !'y ' ceilings made in accordance with letters patent No. 876.1Ill6, granted January 24, 1888, for an improvement in metallicooilings.
In Equity· . This waa a suit for the infringement of letters patent of the United States No. 361,438, granted April 19, 1887, to the firm of Mesker & Bro., for an improvement in sheet-metal ceilings, walls, or panels, by ceiling manufactured and sold by defimdants, made in accordance with the letters patent No. 376,926, granted to Charles Thuener, January 24, 1888. The claim of the patent sued on is as follows: . , . "The combination of the sheets, A, A, A, and the cross-bars, B, are sheet, A, the fold, a 2, and· receiving the edge of the I'djoining sheet,-A,
lapdbelngt8e6Qred to tljeframe'o:t' tJiestructure, andsaidbar,B, having the folds" afJ, descrilJed," '
referred to dntheclaim of the patent,'is a re--enter·ing fold"capableof ,and supporting the edge of the adjoining and,mvibg t\1e return bend or ,part, as, ca;rried far enough out to ,project'beyomhhe ledge beneath, and forming a which .is, ililidden when the ceiling isil1 place. Each ,sheeb bas!qut: the one nailing flange. The folds, b, 7l; of the bars, are rre-eptering ft:llds,capable:;of each 'receiving the end of a; sheet, so that ,the ends of. two sheets may be joined together by means of it. The i crosS-bars; haveno nailing flangtls,: hut,are, supported. upon the ends ofthe · ceiling upon the concerted nailing on one edge of each sheet in ,the manner above stated. ,flanges as, showndn'the drawings of the patent'sued on, forms a ,The bearing. The fold llsed> by ,the defendants ':formed '&,flat bearing; ".In: other respects the foldswete the same; The bars shown in the complainant's patent have two sides, sloping inward ·untiL thtry'Ltneet: '" The blrs in the in"fringing ceiling differed' from them , t only lJrthe faCt ,that they pt'eSentedithl'tle'sides:toview\ the 'top being flat. ·Tile '; defensea <Were lack .'Of(novelty;;and; 'patehtabili:ty'll.rid'"non--infringe.JnElDt., , \A<verylarge offered in: 1upon 'which DlO$tstress was placed by i the ,< defendants! 'counsel are the t following: 'Patent'gtanted' J. D.: Ottiwell,. No; 34B;775; patent 'granted ;,F';.:&ys; ;No. 95:r782;.and::patentgra.ntecL'P. Benjamin F. Rex, for complainants. Gemge H. Knight, for defendants.
THAYER, J., (orally.) This case was argued for a day and a half. The questions and are that it is impossible, in the time at my disposal,to go 'over all Of toe points in detail. of metallic patented, it is .nodouht the:metallic' ceiling pateniedby novelty. But inasmuch as the patl:iht the combinll,tioQ. plaimed..is. patenta1:lle, 'and ,is a ,useful combination, and inasmuch not'$tisfact()rlly overcome' that presumption" and "furthermore; as'it is evident f.rom,an examination made by the defendants that it was copied from the ceiling manufactured by complainants, with merely a colorable difference in ope partic.ular, is,,jD'tpe,form qq\ljl a decree in 4q.Y,9J: ()f ,:In view of oftesthnony th,at has been ... itappear,a to Iloreference for :purpose()( :t!;le (lama,ges resulting from the ..jfngemellt. :it is probllble that easily I;Igre'!AS ,to the 'IlomoUntof tp be llssessed. counsel ,referElllCe to iWiU n9t, be ordered". cc;>mplainants' · upon .If ,he does so' ,insist, ,a reference .will,
Of ,course, be
ordered j but the court will l'eserva the right to put the , costs of such refereuce where they shall belong, if, at the conclusion of the reference, as now, it appears that the reference was unnecessary. '
'THE THINGVALLA. 1
(DIstrict Court, E. D. New York., May 8, 1800.)
The steam-ships Thingvalla and Geiser, belonging to the same company, met OIl' the high seas about 4 o'clock ofa dark and rainy morning. The Thingvalla ported, and kepta-port. The Geiserstarboarded, and remained so. Both vessels reversed, but· the 'Ehingvalla struck the starboard side of the Geiser, ainking her almost imm&diately. 'On petition by the owner of the vessels for limitation of its liability, various' claimants alleged that t1;le collision was caused by tbe fault of the Thingvalla. Clai;m. ants' contentions were as follows': (I) That the vessels were on crossing courses liot meetjng, end on, as petitioner alleged; but held that, elt1:ler case, the right the to port was the same. .(2) That, after the Tbingvalla had ported to the Geiser's 'l'ed light, she lost that light, and saw the green; and that thereupon' it h&came her duty to starboard. that under the circumstances, knowing her own, right to port and the Geiser's errol' in starboarding, and not knOWing but what the, Geisar would attempt to correct her errol' by porting, there was no fault in the Thingvalla's omitting to starboard during the oqmparatively short period from ner ' losing theHelsar's red light to the collision. (3) That either the Thingvalla was, running full speed in a fog, 01' had an insuftlcient lookout. that the evidenoe' did not show fog, and .did show that the Geiser was seen in time for the Thing- , valla to have avoided her if the Geiser had maintained her course. (4) It was charged that the 'l'hingvalla showed no mast-head light, but held, that the evidence ' did not sustain the charge. that thecolH!\ion was not.due to fault· on the part of the Thlngvalla, and the petitioner was entitled to a limitation of itlt liability. ' . ,
In Admiralty. On hearing of petition for limitation of liability. Wing, SJtOudy Putnam', for petitioner. Sidney Chu"b, R. Doc Benedict, E. B. Oonvers, J. Edward Swa1l8trom, I AUguBt J1,eyrnert,and Herbert Kettell, for various claimants.
BENEDICT, J. The petition in this case is filed by a corporation' owning the Danish steam-ships ThingvallaandGeiser, to obtain a ·lim·! itatiou of its liability for damages occasioned by a collision which 00-· curred between those two vessels On the high seas, .not far from' Sable . island,onthe 14th day of August, 1888. At the time of the collision, c, the Geiser was outward bound from New York with passengers and ca.rgo, and the steamer Thingvalla was bound to New York, also laden I With cargo and passengers. These tWQ steanlers came in collisioil about, 4 o'clock of adark and rainy morning, the Thingvalla striking the Gei;' j ser:ori her starboard side, almost at, 'angles, . . right : and'cuttirigher heady:i ' .,
G. Benedlct,ll:sq., of the New.York bar.