The Federal Reporter. Volume 4: Cases Argued and Determined in the Circuit and District Courts of the United States. October-December, 1880. Page: 437
xiv, 928 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:
CAnM . Son,'so.
of anything underlying the whole structure, his patent can-
not be construed as covering the whole, but must be restricted
to the particular construction invented by him in order to
stand at all. Railway Co. v. Bayles, 97 U. S. 554. His
scuttle is made with a bottom stamped out of one piece of
metal, extending upwards outside of the body. The defend-
ant's scuttle is made in substantially the same way, except
that the bottom extends upwards inside of the body. Placing
the body inside of the upward extension of the bottom is an
important and distinctive feature in the plaintiff's invention,
and is made so by his patent. Without that, a scuttle can-
not be said to be his style of scuttle. He rivets the body to
the bottom, and the bottom to the base, and that mode of
fastening them is described in his patent. Had that been
new his patent would probably have covered it, as well as the
method of putting the parts together to form the scuttle. But
that is an old and well-known way of ,fastening parts of
metallic vessels together, and could not be patented to any
one. His patent seems to stand well enough for his particular
style of scuttle fastened in that manner, and that is all. The
defendants do not make that style, and. therefore do not
infringe.
The bill is dismissed, with costs.
CLusm, Trustee, r. JoHson.
(Circuit Court, B. D. New York. November 17, 1880.)
1 Ra-Ises No. 8,579, issued August 3, 1879, to Nathaniel Jenkins, for a
certain form of disc used for valve seats in steam joints, Add not i -
fri ged.
2 EQurVALEWqra .-One substance does not constitute the equivalent of the
other, when each produces a different product under the same con.
ditions.
In Equity. Decision on final hearing.
Thomas William Clarke, for complainant.
B. F. Lee and Gilbert & Cameron, for defendant.497
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.
Boyle, Peyton. The Federal Reporter. Volume 4: Cases Argued and Determined in the Circuit and District Courts of the United States. October-December, 1880., legislative document, 1881; Saint Paul, Minnesota. (https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc36333/m1/451/: accessed July 18, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, UNT Digital Library, https://digital.library.unt.edu; crediting UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.