910

.a ':', t

RtORMONDll.

.. ,vol.

48.;

ATWOOD.

"

Appeals, Fir,t Ommu..

.. . 1'·1

.!

j'

.

I.PATBN'I:I FOR

.. $biB,

Letters patent 'No. 878,861, issued Marcb&, 1888, to Benjamin S. Atwood, for a duplex box-hinge/to be box, consisting of two 1I11.llges joiqted ,to a,cqnnecting, bellt right 'angles at distances from the joints $Qual to the thickness of the 'side ,arid' cOTer of the bOx,'so that, when applied, a smooth "flush 'with the outeJ' surface ,pf the, box, is presented, alld the cover, wben open, tUrns qver, and ,rest/! against the side, are void for of novelty 1n the oompoDElDt elements and new and useful re.ults in the combinatiOn. .. SAMlO-PRIOR Usll. , , , , ; ' " , , ", , ' " " feature cqver tofallllack againl!t tbe side of tbe box Is found 'Iii tM old I;'jmitb and Pailie double-biuge' and, tbe leaves of the latter were :';.uaight,and applied to the,outslde of tbey could ,be applied to the inside "bY,t,lie s1Jnple mllchaniC$1 device of bendinlil'thll shanlfll, the result being substan: same that obtained in the 'Atwood patent.' ' "
'If.,he feature of:applyIDe':thehiqgeso &S to present a "mooth faoe, a,ush with the . box and cover, wali alltlclpated by the Lovett double whicb the pl'fnolple of the Smith and Paine hinge,: alid could be insertea in tbe,same way. , The .feature in thll patent Of having the cover-leaf press against tbe oonneoting ..lja... wben the bO:l' closed, so as to prevent the from moving backward does not make ,tbe becaliSit 'll/larlng& are old,a"d the prior Smith and Paine duplex binge snows a bearing BRainst' the inlide of tbe link, producing the same result. '
,i" i ,

"

"'BiKE. ,"

';"

"

,',

'

-COm

IJ.',

',,'

,

"

"

combination should o,ttbe bearing, it Is by abingefn wIi.joh,owing to dU'letencea"of atr1lotul'Eia, the bearing , la ObtaJDed 'In Bnentlrely di1rerent manner.. " ':Z,li'll\i. 219" reversed·
· , _.J,"" .'. ' '.'

",InEquity. Suit S. Atwood agiJ.inst O.Richf()f ipfringeUlentof;a patent. The patent, below, :&p,injuJ,lctil,)n. and llj:lcQuhting llppeals. ' J'jrederick P. Fish, WilliamK. Ri+hu.'rdBtm,and "ameS J. Jr., {or
i! :", .,' ",' , , , '. '

,l'.j;

.

'.

_;

..·

:.

',C,

,',

flfllBOnE. Tuck.er, fi.or;appell,ee. ,COLT, ll, g«lS' "

,CAJ.U'ENTER a,pAt\LDRICH, District ,', I,. '

,:",

,::' "

J. TIl'i. :letters pabmt No. 878,S61, March ,6. irnprov& ments iIi hinges for boxes an.d chests,. :I,The the llivention, as the,prnd,uction of'f:a whicp,when applieq bQJli prchest, present a, smooth fa?e,flush. with the p{ box or no, part q( it .PElyond the surdrI'hE! Qf two ;the inside ,of
box to which the hinge is applied. At the ends of the bent parts otthe leaves are the knuckles, which lie in places the-pox and of the cover. The two parts of the hinge are umted' by a plate having a knuckJoa at each end, and by pins which pass through the knuckles

i,RI<JHMOND V.ATWOOD.

91l

the inside of the box and of the cover, p1'Qvlded' witheM-pieces turned, at a rightangle to their mainportioDS, having' ktiuckles1 f. fitting, respectively, into places in the side of the box and of the cover, awl united by the plate 9 and pins 1J"h, saidi ,plate,g being tbeoutside of the box, an4 so a\Tauglld, to the cover Whep,lt ,18 closed, and to pen:pf.t ,the cov\!,r' to be removed, eD,tlrely fioomibeiop of tbe box wben it is open, mb: staDtiatf"as " ",' ' I , " " " ,:'[ :',;' ,,)Y .. : aoovedesC1'100d:" ," Ii ,;

on the leaveS and' pIa:te; and so' foml"a double hinge. The plate is so as to permitthe !eaf,on the co*r of the to bear against Inner sIde when the box 1S closed.' When the box IS open the cover over and lieagairiSt the side of' the box. The claim wIll tum is a§ioUows: ' , : , , ".4: box-hinge, comPosed ,of the j;larts d to be respectively,
, _;_ I

,The' uV" geveral': but only' tWo'are relied upon; namely, Want of inveqtion, and'l1on':'infringement.' , ,:,/: In analyzing the Atwood patent in the light of'the prior state of the .art, we ,tmd that inti:), the combinatidn claim, was 'dld,i111Q weil 'kDown at the date of the invelltio,n. pm.. a plate i:AAtw9 cP2B§. wereqld. tI:1e, to 9£tp.e, cQver old. by of the ,tn,flnyJ9rms of hinge J?Ut 111 eVIdence, that in thC Mtajl$ pf /luch' as ,turning the knuckles one way,.'or f,9,,r.' t,'U,rn,lng" in P,am, tU,la,r:wll,Y, 'th,'ere would " " no does seek to coyer any pattlt?1ar JRrmQ£'CQuslructlon Ip.thesetespects. It IS also admitted that beanngs that ,no by itself, in'the bearing of the cov;er.:lea'fagainst the 'plate wheri thetb6x 15 closed.· The of the Atwoodhinge'consistsm.ltuming the leaves at rig11t, jri 'the iu\?ur there was no J?atertta1¥e hoVelty' Ui merely bending the leaf a hmge to conform to the'ed:ge of the' covet 'or', back of '3; ,box, this feature is seen in the oldsii).glehinge and the wd LOvett :double hinge., If there is any inverttioniii Ithe Atwood·device;innust lie, in the conlbination of elements desdibe\Nh the claim of Lthepatent corisidered asa whole, whereby s.ome new'a:tM:ifu'provedresultisaccomplished. ; . ' " , ',", ,; , , It"isconteMed that.the Atwoo!i.hinge" considemng,the as a whole, does embody: certain imprQyements: First! to returned way over on the back of the box; second, the hinge'can be set flush with the cQyer, and baclH>£ctqe box, thus .. ing the.;projectionwhich' is fpunq\tl. tb:e single hinge, and making ,t.1le box :friore .more appearance; third, by having the. obtained holds 'the cOYer :and box IS , :; of the AtwQo<1 h.mge which the cqver,Js tlu,s ID' the .
9f

,

1

oW

912

FEPERAL

vol. 48.

Smith'and Paine double hinge, with which Atwood admits he was fami!. the Smith.and 'PaiDe hinge WfJre straight and applied to the outside ofthe box;: but 'it'hadthesarnecapacity of permitting the cover to'fall.clear hack aathe AtwO'od,hinge.., Indeed, if you bend the shanks of the Smith and Paine hinge so that they may be to the ofth,e you have substantially the patented device. An¢,suc4 beiqg: 0\9,in tp.e art, it would nattlrallysuggest itself to any skilled mechanic who desired, to construct a hinge where th,e leaves \Veteto'be attached to the inside of a box. .',... to the second featdre t1f the Atwood, hinge,......that it prefitc!3, the 1>0'x covel,-it is admitted that the prior Lovett double hinge, which em110dies the the and Paine hinge, could be inserted in the same way. Iii dealing with the si,ngle,hinge.l it:would seem, owing to the general form hi l1ge, to be a matter of in constrp.qtiolh pr ,of the ,modeQ{applyingthe hinge to the box, whether or pot be put in ,1vith the 'wood. '., ' , 'J:'he,:teJPainil1g adva,ntage'M the Atwood hinge relates to tbebearing ,Qltt the 'cdnnecting plate when the'box is closed, by the held, thereby a'ny backward iPs>Vetilent is ,attached. td;:'this point by But bear'rlgsarevery an of prioI' when the cpveJ: 1$ a on the. or ,the hnlt,'W hlOb prevents, mC/vmg It IS for these reaso.tls, we presume" that lf9wplainant's the bearing the Atwood pot a fea,tura novelty. ' assume that is in the form of beating, in the Atwood hinge, 'taken in connectioniw'ith'the whole mechanism; an examination of the defendll.nt's hinge shows a different .broad connecting which characterizes th(Atwood hinge, is not found indefel1dant'Jl binge, but instead thereof tllera is a straight piece of metal turned in th,e opposite direction, to the liD,ik of the Atwood patent, and standing, at rightangles to the bent part of,the cover-leaf, instead ofiparallelwith it, as in the Atwood patent; and the Ilnk, therefore, has no 'knuckles rolled over its extremities, but simply holes bored through to receive the pins. Owing to this difference· in construction, it is apparent that in defendant's hinge the broad face of the link could not come .to' a bearing against the and that the only bearing is between the t,hin edge of' the leaf and the straight part of the coverleaf; is the bearing which is found in the old Lovett hinge. ,But it iSllrged by the complainant that in the constrnction of the Atwood binge itls neccsslll!y that the should lie in a different plane frotn,'the link in prqer to obtain the Atwood bearing; that such constrQction.isan imvortant and that it is embodied In thedefEmdant's hinge. :It is true that the defendant's hinge is soconis also form is to the practical operation of the hinge, because, by cutting the slot in the cover-

of

NATIONAL

F. B·. 61:.

P.CO.

11.

AMERICAN P. P.

&: B. CO.

913

leaf, where the bearing takes place, a little deeper, the leaves and the link may all be made in one plane. While one particular form of attaching the leaf to the plate may.be essential in the Atwood hinge in order to obtain the Atwood bearing, the defendant only uses that form to obtain a different bearing. Upon the whole, we have grave doubt whether there is anything patentablei,n the combinatioI,l claim. of the Atwood patent, but if the sofeature," in combination with the other elements of the claim, is sufficient to sustaiIi the patent, then there is nO infringement shown, beoause the defendant's hinge is constructed with a different bearing. On the question of patentable novelty, it is somewhat significant that the application for the Atwood patent was filed in the patentoffice, April 4, 1884, and that the patent was not granted until March 6, 1888; that the application was three times: rejected by the patentoffice on reference to the Jenness patent of 1873, and that the evidence goes to prove that it was finally granted by an examiner who had not and to the was new. previously dealt with the This case is pending in this court upon an appeal from an interlocutory decree of theoircuit court of the United States for the district of Masan injllUction. In the opinion of this couti, the complainant is not entitled to an injunction, and the decree of the circuit reversed. .

NATIONAL FOLDING Box & PAPER Co. Box Co.

17.

AMERICAN PAPER PAIL &

(cwew£t Oourt, S. D. New York. January 15,1892.)
PATBliTS FOR INVENTIONS-CONSTRUCTION-RES JUDIOATA.

The construction of a patent in an action is conclusive in another aetton by the patentee against a third person, where no new defenses are interposed. .

.

In Equity, Suit by the National Folding Box & Paper Company against the Ame,ican Paper Pail & Box Company for infringement of )ettel'$'patent No. 171,866, granted January 4,1876, to Reuben Ritter, for an improvement.in paper boxes. Heard on motion for a preliminary injunction. Granted. Walter D. Edmund8, (lOmplainant. Billing8 Cardozo, (R. Bach McMaster, of counsel,) for defendant. LACQMBE, Circuit Judge. The patent sued npon was construed by this 41 Fed. Rep. 140. For the purposes. of court in [email protected] Co. v. this motion, that'construGtion is to be accepted; especially in. view of the fact that no new defense,S are interposed. The patent was limited to a locking' device, which operated by. the engagenllJllt of a hooking device with a slot) not at 1\ single point of contact, but where the hook and slot v.48F.no.11-58