The Federal Reporter with Key-Number Annotations, Volume 272: Cases Argued and Determined in the Circuit Courts of Appeals and District Courts of the United States and the Court of Appeals in the District of Columbia, June-August, 1921. Page: 23
xx, 1023 p. ; 23 cm.View a full description of this legislative document.
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
EDWARDS MFG. CO. V. NATIONAL FIREWORKS DIST. CO. 23
(272 F.)
Upon the appeal of the children, No. 3444, the decree below, as to
them, will be reversed, and the bill, as to them, dismissed. Upon ap-
peal of the City National Bank, No. 3442, with reference to the
mortgage on the farm, the decree will be reversed and modified so
as to sustain the mortgage to the extent of the title possessed by Annie
Joy Halliday, the mother. On the appeal of the Delaware National
Bank, No. 3443, as to the preferential payment, the decree will be
reversed, and the bill dismissed.
The appellants will recover their costs upon all the appeals. The
cases will be remanded for the entry of new decrees and further pro-
ceedings in accordance with this opinion.
EDWARDS I FO. CO. v. NATIONAL FIREWORKS DISTRIBUTING CO.
NATIONAL FLEWORKS DISTRIBUTING CO. v. EDWARDS MFG. CO.
(Circuit Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit. April 14, 1921.)
Nos. 3445, 3446.
1. Patents X=328-926,308, claim 6, for toy pistol, held valid.
Claim 6, of the Wertz patent, No. 926,308, for a toy pistol, held valid.
2. Patents <=168(2)-Anmendment to meet Patent Ofiee's view as to proper
designation of parts held not rn estoppel limitation.
Where a claim for a toy pistol was amended to provide for a spring on
the hammer, instead of the trigger, to meet the Patent Office's views as
to the proper designation of the different parts of a pistol, the amendment
involved no surrender of the claim as first stated, and could not be con-
strued as an estoppel limitation, either in intent or effect.
3. Patents =l17-Not to be denied equivalents, differing only in form and
arrangement, though art crowded.
Though an invention relating to toy pistols is in a crowded art, and
cannot be given a broad range of equivalents, it should not be given such
narrow construction as to exclude from its protection equivalents func-
tioning in exactly the same manner, producing the same result, and
differing only in form and arrangement.
4. Patents @=174-C aim not narrowly construed, to extent that it introduced
new element into the art.
A claim for a toy pistol, to the extent that it introduced a feeding
spring, which was a new element in the art, should not be narrowly con-
strued.
6. Patents 0=234--Not infringed 'by device of different construction, differ-
ent mode of operation, and different result.
A patent for a toy pistol is not infringed by a device disclosing a dif-
ferent plan of construction, a different mode of operation, and a different
specific result.
6. Patents @=328-926,388, claim 6, for toy pistol, held infringed.
Claim 6 of the Wertz patent, No. 926,308, for a toy pistol, held infringed,
though a rigid pawl, held in place by a spring engaging with the trigger,
was used to operate the feeding element, instead of a spring alone, en-
gaging on the hammer.
7. Patents 432"8-91,956, for toy pistol, held not Infringed, if valid.
The Clark patent, No. 991,956. for a toy pistol, held not infringed, if
valid, in view of the prior art.
*=For other cases see same topic & KEY-NUMBER in all Key-Numbered Digests & Indexes
Upcoming Pages
Here’s what’s next.
Search Inside
This document can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Legislative Document.
The Federal Reporter with Key-Number Annotations, Volume 272: Cases Argued and Determined in the Circuit Courts of Appeals and District Courts of the United States and the Court of Appeals in the District of Columbia, June-August, 1921., legislative document, 1921; Saint Paul, Minnesota. (https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc38843/m1/45/: accessed April 24, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, UNT Digital Library, https://digital.library.unt.edu; crediting UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.