87 P'E;l3ERAl,., REPORT,ER., '
iug in the'defendant'scoupler,;isAhe of tOO raising of the locking block through the interposition of a trainman. These differences between the two devices. tQ,disting:vJsh the defendant's mechanism from that of the compl,inant's' quite as markedly as complainant's is distinguishe4 from the old art. '..If there is a patentable difference between the invention of Lorrairie and Aubin and the many devices prior in to, them for accomplishing the same result,,there is the same patentable difference between the defendant's coupler. and that of' Both are mere improvers. The field was a narrow one for either. There is as much to distinguish Tower from Lorraine and Aubin as there was to distingufsh the latter from J'anney, Dowling, Ferguson,Wineman, Kling, and others who have traveled over the same field. We therefore conclude, tbat although an S-shapeiiknuckle, not pivoted, in combination with a gravity pin which does not normally ride on the tail of the knuckle, performs substantially the same functions as the knuckle and gravity lock of the patent in,suit, yet this, fact is not enough to justify us ip, finding, infringement of a patent so limited as that of Lorraine and Aubin.. Unless. complainant is entitled to a considerable range of equivl;llents, it 'cannot be'said that the elements in the defendant's combination are identical with those in the first claim of the patent in .such a range of equivalents as would bring the defendant'sdev\ce within the scope of the complainant's first chlimwould invalid,ateithis claim upon. the ground of anticipation. The elementsin,cluded in the first claim should all be read into each. of the.other here J Two of the elements, the ::>.rB'haped knuckle centrally pivoted and the gravity pin riditlgdirectlyon the tail of knuckle, in the infringing device, . we the. :(:irst cl.aim. '. The groove, G,. IUl:d the recess, S.,nor, tne shoulder, which are eleiments in ,some of the other claims,are not found in the infringing ,device, nor any equiv,alent for:t],lem, within the limited range of eqnivalents tOjwb.icb .entitled. . ..' . , We hav.e not deemed it necessllJ;'Y ,to go into the question.raised by the criticisms made upon thereisslled patent, nor ,have we deemed it ,a,t all important, in the view. have as to the question of infringement, to consider the.efffctiPf the ,proceedings; in the patent office as limiting the claims. patent. ,The decree Of the circuit eourt must be. affir:m.e(}. the defense oLnoninfringement We expl'es,s no validity of the Tower patent.
OHRIST:ret al.,.;RYGEIA PNEUit'At'lOBICYCLE:sJmDLE co. et aI. , '.. (Olrcult Court, D. Jtlpe
, walIed<\epresslons,adapted t9 rllcelve firmly in place. Ii. ·
PATENTS-INVENTION-BICYCLE SADDLES. Therels ,00. Invention In
Large SlUes and Increasing ,pdPulllrity; cannot be accepted Its certain proofs of novelty and invenUon:NVhell made an<;l SOld J?y
OF PATEI'lTAllILrTyLUARGE SALEiS.
CHRISTY V. HYGEIA:' PNEUMATIC BIC'lCLE SADDLE CO.
complainant, differs willely in. many respects from the article shown In the specifications and covered by the claims.
B. SAME-BICYCLE I:'lADDLE!j"
The Christy patent, No; 532,444, tor a bicycle saddle having a solid top with vertical walled depressions adapted to receive and hold in place two cushions or pads, is void for want of Invention.
This is a suit in equity by H. A. Christy & Co. ·against the Hygeia Pneumatic Bicycle Saddle Company (Walter B. Wentz, receiver) and William J. Sneeringer for alleged infringement of letters patent No. 532,444, issued January 15, 1895, to Henry A. Christy, for a bicycle Julian C. Dowell (Benj. Butterworth and Wm. A. Redding, of counsel), for complainants. Stewart & Stewart, Horace Pettit, and Stinson & Williams, for defendants. MORRIS, District Judge. The defenses are want of patentable novelty and noninfringement. The claims of the patent are as follows:
"(1) A bicycle saddle having a solid top provided upon 'its upper surface wIth recessed or sunken portions at each side of the seat portion, constructed to receive and hold removable pads; said recesses being formed with abrupt marginal walls to prevent the pads from slipping, substantially as described. (2) A picycle saddle having a solid top provided upon its upper surface with recessed or sunken portions, at ·each side of the seat portion, constructed to l'eceive and holdpll,ds, sa'id recesses being formed with abrupt marginal walls to prevent the pads from slipping, In combination with pads adapted to fit said,recessel5 so as to be removably reta;lned therein, substantially ali! descrIbed. (3) A bicycle saddle' having a solid top'provided upon its upper surface with or sUnken portions at each side of the seat portion constructed to receive and hold ,removable pads, and having a horn portion shortened or truncatlld, 'so that It wlll not project between the legs of the rider; and also cut away or recessed upon Its upper surface centrally .of said hom, portion, substantially as described."
; .The complainant contends that daims 1 and 2 are infringed. Claim :3 is not in;controversy, the reason that in the defendants' saddle lit is conc::eded that the horn is not truncated or shortened up so as not to project between the legs of the rider as called for by claim 3. Claim 1 is for the saddle plate made with sunken recesses on each side of :the center liue,of the seat, the. recesses being formed with abrupt marginal walls to. receive and hold removable pads, and prevent the pads from slipping. Claim 2 is for the same device in combination with pads adapted tofU the recesses so as to be l'emovablyretained therein. As the defendants' saddle has the removable pads fitted into the recesses, if it fufriuges either it infringes both claims, and, so far as this case is concerned, claims 1 and 2 may be considered as identical. The Christy saddle, as manufactured by the complainant and known to the trade, is quite different in some of its features from the saddle described in tbe specification and tbe drawings of the patent, so that the question to be decided in this suit turns, not upon the simihU'ity at the defendants' saddle to that made by The complainant, but upon the validity of the claims of the patent in suit and the infringement of those claims . asexplained by,the. The prior patents put in evidence
870' FEDERW mpOJRTER. , '
show that there was nothing new 'in any 'ofj'heobjects which Christy has in mind to accomplish. Christy states 'that his object to lessen the discomfort and jnjuI;Y'Yhich ,1;Ucycle from sure of the, saddle upon the peri:qreuill f , and" from the rubbing of the legs against the horn. IuHicks' patent for a cushion seat designed particularly for bic:wcles,-No. 487,367, October 11, 1892,-he states that his object is to ()btain a cushion seal' thatwiII adjust itself to the shape of the rider, ,and at the, same tune prevent injurious !pressure againl'lt the perinreum. This he tried tl;l 'acC'ompIish by an inflatable cushion with a covering of any suitable material secured in any desired manner to a base of some inelastic material, preferably of wood, the the, cushion to be fdrmed with a fissure extending from the' front rearward to any desired extent. He says:
"This fissure ,prevents upward pressure on the perInreum, when a ,person sits thereupon. This fissure may be formed by securing a portion of the top of the cushion intermediate the sides down firmly upon the lower portion thereof, allowing the cushion to be inflated at each side thereof. The fissure may extend only part way toward the rear 'Of the G:ushion,· ·. *' or it may pass to the rearward limit of the it into !lir chambers. · · · Such a form relieves the perinreum. ... · ."
We thus have"in the Hicks inelastic:;>base upon which are secured two', cushions to ,support the, ischial tuberosities of the rider, and separated along the center line of the seat by, a vacant space which relieves ,the perinreum froIn 'all pressure. This}s precisely what is accomplished by the two. qr pads with the space between them shown in the Christy saddle as manufacturedby the complainant. In patent to N,QI 19 Of purpose of the blcycle saddle tl::(ere 10 WhICh there lS ,l;,gt outJrom the framework of the saddle the portion between, the points where the ischial tuberosities are to rest, or a depression' is formed in the frame' there, so is to leave a vacant space with nothing to press against the perinreum. It is apparent, therefore, that the claim of Christy was -rightly restricted to the-mechanical device.· \)y, whicIi a sllddle having two separate'd cushions or pa(ls, with aspax!e between them, might be constructed; his clairrtedlbyhim in his patent, being solely for the sunken depressions in top soJ1'ormedas to receive the cushions or pads, and pl'evEmtthe pads slipping. It is conceded that if cushions shown 4I.,the defendants' saddle-are fastened to the top ohv'saddle with:out :depressions, tIiere is nO infl'ingement. The validity 'of the patentthen depends uponW'hether, in 'v'iew' of the state of the art, it r,equired invention to construct' a saddle top with'vertical walled depressions adapted to receive thetivo cushions' and,:hold them in place. It is certainly a case in which aU that is new in the mode of construction is not verydistingl1ishabie from mel'e mechanical imand if ifiOO!n be shown,that the idea of the mode of construction was not ·,new, then, 1 tbinki nothing remains but mechanical skill. It being conceded that a.Il that the: comp[ainant:Can make claim to is the depressions to 'receive the pads, it is important to see if that idea, in connection 'with the seat iofametal-top saddle, 'was new. It is a matter of"observatidn that' adepressiOll,
CHRISTY V. HYGEIA PNEUMATIC BICYCLE SADDLE
more or less deep, made in a seat in order to receive a cushion, is common and qld; and in the English patent in evidence, No. 12,854 of 1889, to Henry Edward Newton, he describes an equestrian saddle. to be made of thin sheet steel or iron in which "two cup-like depressions are stamped, one depression being on ,each side of the central axis of the blank." "These depressions are subsequently filled up with India rubber, gutta percha, padding, or any other suitable elastic supstance, so as to render the seat comfortable and elastic to the rider." And his claim 2 is for "the cup-like depressions, F, F, as described, as illustrated in the drawing for the purposes herein set forth." This, it seems to me, is the substance of complainants' and claim, viz. in a metal-top saddle a depression on each side of the axial line, made to receive padding, intended to make the seat elastic to the pressure of the tuberosities of the ischii. Here we have the same problem of a rigid metal seat to be made elastic at the same two points of contact with the rider's body, and the same device to accomplish it, viz. depressed spots in the metal, to be filled with pads. H is urged that there are in the complainant's device the addi· tional elements that the depressiollB are made with abrupt walls to prevent the pads from slipping, and that the pads are removable, both of which features are asserted to be important and useful improvements. But with the cup-like depressions to hold the pads, already shown by Newton's patent, it does not appear that it reo quired invention to make the depressions sufficiently abrupt to pre· vent the filling from slipping. In his specification Christy states:
"In my Improved saddle I have only a truncated horn; · · · and also prefer that tbis truncated horn portion. Instead of being convex upon its ,upper surface. as In tlle old construc,tlon, should be cut away or concave centrally thereof. thereby' giving room for the portions of the person which are so easily Injured. I also preferably' make the rear of the saddle wider than ordinarily constructed, so as to sustain the fieshy portions of the buttocks as well as the pelvis, and, provide upon side of the seat portion a sunken portion or recess conlltructed to receIve and hold pads or cushions which may be remova· bly fitted therein for the comfort and ease of the rider." .
In the drawings the pads are shown lying in the depressions, and not extending above the plane of the metal top of the saddle. In the Christy saddle, as manufa'Ctured, the horn is not truncated, it is not cut away or made concave on its upper ,surface, and the saddle is not made; wide, and. does not support the fleshy portion of the buttocks at all. As manufactured, the Christy saddle presents nothing to the body of the rider but the two small pads on which the two ischii rest, sustaining the whole of the rider's weight. Instead of the concavity, the trupeated horn being cut out to relieve pressure on the pel'inreum, there'is substituted on the saddle as manufactured an open spa\:e the whole length of the saddle from front to rear be· tween the two cushions, which space, from the cushions being con· siderably separated. and being built up quite high above the plane of the metal saddle" is both wide and deep. Merit is claimed for the saddle becanse the r.ushions are removable, but as manufactured they are held in the by catches of twisted wire. Any cushion is affixed. to a, solid, bf\se may be removed if the fa,sten.
: GreAt; lldvIinlage 'is daMned because the from slipabrupt wirUs' of 'the \stinken' reces,seBpreventthe ping. But'ifit was not new, lliit is shown by theEIi&lishpatent to Newton, to'mike recessesjn ainetal saddle to receive cusbions, it can, hardly be said to require invention; when. the ,cushions as used areliable'tcFslip, to make the recesses sufficiently abrupt to prevent slipping. TII.e strongest and most persuasive argument which the complainatit 'ui'ges in' fa VOl' of the patentabillty of,tlieChristy saddle is based upon the testimon,y'shdwip,g the rapidly increasing sales, and its decided popularity; since it Ms become known upon the market.': But the saddle mal::mfactured differs so widely from the saddle sl:1()wh itdhe speCificatioIisand drawings that it is not easy to determine 'just what featUres make it acceptable to the trade 'and to those who it. It would appear that some of t4e features ofthe saddle as 'man.'ufactured which a'renot shown in the Saddle as pat· ented tnore novelty and'l1tHity than tbbse des'cribed in the patent. 'It may well be that tlIe advantages of the manufactured saddle result from the fact that the saddle plate is reduced in size until it is nothing more than"a snpportfor the two pads, and has no bearing 'at all for the'fleshy portion of the buttocks so that ,the rider's weight 'tests exclusively Qpon the two, ischii of; the pelvis, an'd also from 'the factthat the intervai!:between,the cushions/or pads leaves an open space rtom front to back similar to that .shown in the Hicks :which there can be a current of air, and because of patent, which there,cl;\n be, no pressure upon the perinreum. It quite probable that it may be these unpatented features, not shown; in the specilftca:tionsor drawings, which', have given tM Christy, saddle the rather than atiylHlvantage' of con' from ,the facttliat the pads ,are set'Jn depressions, stru'ction are, detaehable.' It may also be thaLwHh ,the enorJ;Ilously inereased lise::6fbicycles experience may have taught particnlar riders that runs it is less, l;1sejJn'e"ld n d of than another, although not:sqagreeable at fir,st" parativeutility t11e acceptance of the improved device may just as well,blfafttiihifed to features not clllimed irdM'patent isan:un· safe guideilh'detertniningth'eexJstence of'patentabl'(ll inveMioh. Up()U the daise, considering theprlorstateof the 3rt, 1 'ha¥e f,orced that)! !d.id' not toifomr.fthe recesses on 'the ,surface, 'df !:t"lsohd·top saddle Wlthabrupt margmal them from, slipping. ' '; " walls to t:eceive the
,. '. .
· , i. .
1).',' . , '_ )'.,
" , ;
, ; . i
,'. ',.: 'J
PNlpNSWi1rcH & SIGNAL CO.·et;l:\.I. v. PHILADEI;fHIA & R. R., , (Circuit Court, E. D. May 26, 1898.)
'I'he 'WestJnghouse patent, No. 270,867, for improvements In' electrIc ,circuits for railway signaling, is void because it was In practical and public usefQr mOre than two yearsbefQre ;the patent was applied for; and lJecl/-use a complete description of it was previously publlshed in the "RailrqadGQ,zette/', a tr,ade a general circula tion ilmong l'ai!: road people 'and those connected with rallroads. '. "
. . ,