¶1Tbe validity of 'Blaisdell’s patent to the extent of certain narrow claims having been upheld by this court [in Blaisdell v. Tufts, Case No. 1,491], must be taken for granted in deciding this motion, unless some decidedly new evidence, mot accessible before, or some other reason for doubting the soundness of the result ■reached in the former case, is brought forward. The defendant will have every opportunity for contesting all questions, but the prima facie case on this point is with the plaintiff.
¶2I think the apparatus of Dows, made under his patent of 1864, is within the fourth claim of Blaisdell’s patent of 1863, his cup being, so far as I can see, a movable diaphragm operating substantially like the fixed diaphragm, U, of the patent.
¶3Temporary injunction granted.