1. Letters patent for a combination of old ingredients are
infringed by substituting for one of its elements a mechanical
equivalent which was well known to be such when they were
granted.
2. Letters patent No. 58,048, granted June 6, 1865, to Jacob E.
Buerk for an improvement in watchman's time detectors are valid and
are infringed by letters patent No. 117,442, granted July 25, 1871,
to Anton Meter for an improvement in watchman's time checks
This is a suit, commenced July 5, 1872, by Jacob E. Buerk
against William Imhaeuser, Theodore Hahn, and Charles Keinath doing
business as Imhaeuser & Co., for the alleged infringement by
them of letters patent No. 48,048, granted to him June 6, 1865, for
an improvement in watchman's time detectors.
The drawings and specification of his letters are as
follows:
image:a
Page 101 U. S. 648
image:b
"
No. 48,048"
"
The Schedule referred to in these Letters
patent"
"
and making part of the same"
"
To all whom it may concern:"
"Be it known that I, Jacob E. Buerk, of Boston, in the County of
Suffolk and State of Massachusetts, have invented a new and
improved watchman's time detector, and I do hereby declare that the
following is a full, clear, and exact description thereof, which
will enable others skilled in the art to make and use the same,
reference
Page 101 U. S. 649
being had to the accompanying drawings forming a part of this
specification, in which:"
"Figure 1 represents a face view of this invention."
"Figure 2 is a vertical central section of the same, the line
x x, Figure 1, indicating the plane of section."
"Figure 3 is an inverted plan of the movement."
"Figure 4 is a face view of the same."
"Figure 5 is a diagram representing the keys necessary for the
operation of this invention."
"Similar letters of reference indicate like parts."
"This invention relates to an improvement in that class of
watchman's time detectors on which a patent has been granted to
John Buerk, Jan. 1, 1861. In that case, a strip of paper is used
stretched on the circumference of a drum to which a rotary motion
is imparted by a clock or watch movement, and a series of spring
points serve to perforate this strip according to the time when
these points are operated by a series of keys of peculiar shape. On
the strip are marked the hours, corresponding to hours on the dial
of the clock or watch, and the time when one or more of the spring
points have been actuated can be ascertained after the strip has
been taken off. This construction necessitates a drum in addition
to the ordinary clock or watch movement, whereby the expense of the
mechanism is increased, and furthermore the operation of applying
and removing the strips of paper is tiresome, and requires much
care."
"These difficulties are avoided by using a clock or watch with a
stationary index and revolving dial. On this revolving dial are
fastened removable dials of paper or other suitable material, with
a series of circles corresponding to the positions of the spring
points, and these spring points are concealed under the stationary
index. By inserting one of the keys and turning the same round, the
paper dial is pierced by one or more of the spring points, and the
time when this takes place can be ascertained by examining said
dial when the watch or clock is opened. The perforations in the
paper dial are made from below under the stationary hand, leaving a
slight barb on the upper surface, and a similar perforation cannot
be produced even if the watch or clock be opened, except if the
paper dial is taken off."
"
A represents a clock or watch movement made in the
ordinary manner, and provided with a revolving dial
B,
which is mounted on the centre shaft
C in place of the
ordinary hands, and
Page 101 U. S. 650
which rotates under the stationary index
D. The dial is
marked with figures from 1 to 12, and it revolves once in twelve
hours. From this dial project two or more points
a, which
serve to retain a false dial
E of paper or other suitable
material, and this dial is held in place by a disk
b,
which slips over the centre shaft and which is provided with little
holes or sockets to correspond in number and position to the points
a. The paper dial
E is marked with figures from 1
to 12, like the main dial, and with a series of concentric rings
c corresponding in number to the stations in the beat. The
paper dial shown in the drawing is marked with six rings, to
correspond to six different stations."
"The spaces between the rings
c correspond in number
and position to a series of spring points
d, the points of
which are situated under the index
D and made to project
through a slot in the dial plate
B'. When left to follow
their own elasticity, said spring points do not reach above the
surface of the dial plate, but they are so arranged that one or
more of them can be forced up simultaneously and made to penetrate
the paper dial, different keys,
K, being provided, each of
which serves to raise one of said spring points or of a combination
of two or more of them."
"One of the keys is intended to be fastened by a chain or other
suitable means to a post or other fixed part on each station in the
beat of the watchman, and the watchman carries the watch. On
arriving at a station, he inserts the key, and by turning the same
a perforation is produced which gives a record of the time when the
watchman has visited the station. The watch, of course, is intended
to be locked, so that the watchman cannot get at the paper dial in
order to produce fraudulent perforations to cover a neglect of his
duty, and the keys, simple as they look, are so shaped that they
cannot easily be imitated, for the slightest difference in the
height or position of the bit would produce a different
action."
"Having thus described my invention,"
"I claim as new and desire to secure by letters patent:"
"1st, the use of a false revolving dial
E in
combination with the stationary index
D and spring points
d, constructed and operating substantially and for the
purpose set forth."
"2d, producing the perforations on the paper dial, or its
equivalent, from the inside out instead of from the outside in, as
before. "
Page 101 U. S. 651
The bill was taken as confessed against Keinath. Imhaeuser and
Hahn filed an answer denying the infringement and setting up that
the indicators manufactured by them were made under letters patent
No. 117,442, granted July 25, 1871, to Anton Meyer, of Stuttgart,
Germany, for an improvement in watchman's time checks, and that the
complainant's letters are void for want of novelty, the invention
therein claimed having been anticipated by a French patent granted
to one Nolet in 1847; another granted in the same year to one
Schwilgue; English letters No. 957, granted in 1852 to John
Rowbotham; English letters No. 1431, granted in 1862 to Thomas
Buckney; and in a German work by Emanuel Schreiber, entitled, "Dr.
Friedrich Wilhelm Barfuss' Geschechte der Uhrmacher Kunst von den
altester Zeiten bis auf unsere Tage," published in the year 1856 by
Bernh. Friedr. Voeght, in Weimar, Germany.
The drawings and specification of Meyer's letters are as
follows:
image:c
Page 101 U. S. 652
image:d
"
To all whom it may concern:"
"Be it known that I, Anton Meyer, of Stuttgart, in the Empire of
Germany, have invented a new and useful improvement in watchman's
time detectors, and I do hereby declare the following to be a full,
clear, and exact description thereof which will enable those
skilled in the art to make and use the same, reference being had to
the accompanying drawing forming part of this specification, in
which drawing:"
"Figure 1 represents a face view of this invention. Fig. 2 is a
similar view of the same, the dial plate being partially broken
away to expose the marking dies. Fig. 3 is a transverse central
section of the same. Fig. 4 is a detached section of the cam-shaped
bridge."
"Similar letters indicate corresponding parts."
"This invention consists in the arrangement of one or more
stationary marking dies in the face plate of a watch or clock in
combination
Page 101 U. S. 653
with a cam-shaped bridge extending over the marking die or dies,
and with one or more keys, the bit or bits of which correspond in
position to the marking die or dies in such a manner that, by
affixing a disk of paper or other suitable material to the movable
dial plate of the watch or clock, and causing said disk to revolve
between the stationary marking die or dies and the cam-shaped
bridge, the key or keys, on being introduced into the watch or
clock case and turned in the proper direction under the cam-shaped
bridge, will depress the paper or other material on the marking die
corresponding to the position of its bit, and the exact time when
the watchman has visited a certain room or station on his beat will
be recorded on the disk of paper or other material."
"In the drawing,
A designates the case of a watch or
clock, in which is firmly secured a stationary face plate
a, the central part of which is cut out to make room for a
disk
b, which is secured to an arbor
c. This
arbor connects by suitable gear with the clock movement, and it
revolves once in twelve hours. The surface of the disk
b
is flush with the surface of the stationary face plate
a,
and it is provided with two or more points
d so that a
dial
e of paper or other suitable material can be readily
attached to it, and that, when such dial is placed on the disk, it
will be compelled to follow the motion of the same. From the face
plate
a project one or more stationary dies
f,
the faces of which have engraved or otherwise produced in them
figures, letters, or other suitable characters, and which, when
more than one such die is used, are set in a radial direction, as
shown in Fig. 2 of the drawing. These dies are situated beneath a
bridge
g, which is firmly secured to the case
a
and which is perforated with a hole
h to receive the key
K. The undersurface of the bridge is cam-shaped, as shown
in Fig. 4, and the upper surface of the key is rounded, so that
when the key is inserted into the keyhole and turned round under
the bridge, the projection
i on said key will be depressed
toward the die, and the dial
e, which is carried through
between the dies and the bridge, will receive an impression to
correspond to the face of the die. The position of the projection
i on the key, of course, must correspond to the position
of the die, and if more than one die is used, several keys have to
be prepared, one for each die. These keys are intended to be
secured in the various rooms or stations composing the beat of the
watchman, the watchman carrying the clock or watch, the case of
which is locked by a key in the possession of the superintendent or
proprietor of the place. On reaching a certain station, the
watchman inserts the key in his clock, and by turning it a mark is
produced
Page 101 U. S. 654
on the dial
e indicating the station. On the dial is
also marked a time table
j, and the bridge
g may
serve as the index pointing on the divisions of the time table. As
the dial is carried around by the clock movement, the time when a
mark is produced on the dial by one of the keys can be read off
from the time table, and the movements of the watchman on his beat
can be controlled. If the number of stations in the beat exceeds
the number of the marking dies in the clock, keys can be prepared
with two or more projections, and with six marking dies, a large
number of stations can be controlled. If desired, the bridge
g may be made yielding, so that its action on the key will
depend not only on its cam-shaped face, but also on the action of a
spring having a tendency to force said bridge in toward the marking
die or dies."
"I am aware that a watchman's time detector has been heretofore
made in which spring marking points are used to indicate the
different rooms or stations in the beat, such as described in the
patent of J. E. Buerk, June 6, 1865. For these spring marking
points I have substituted stationary dies
r presenting
figures or letters whereby the stations of a beat are readily
recognized, and furthermore, the stationary dies are easier made
than the spring marking points, they are less liable to get out of
order, and the impressions produced by them cannot be forged
without having exact counterfeits of the dies."
"I disclaim everything shown and described in the patent of J.
E. Buerk, above mentioned."
"What I claim as new and desire to secure by letters patent
is:"
"The stationary marking die or dies, situated beneath a
cam-shaped bridge, in combination with a suitable key or keys and
with a dial passing through between the marking die or dies and the
bridge, substantially as herein shown and described."
The court passed a decree in favor of the complainant and
granted him a perpetual injunction restraining the defendants from
making, manufacturing, or causing to be manufactured, using, or
vending to others to be used, watchman's time detectors embracing,
containing, or using the invention described in and secured by the
said letters patent No. 48,048.
Imhaeuser thereupon appealed to this Court.
Page 101 U. S. 655
MR. JUSTICE CLIFFORD delivered the opinion of the Court.
Equivalents may be claimed by a patentee of an invention
consisting of a combination of old elements or ingredients as well
as of any other valid patented improvement, provided the
Page 101 U. S. 656
arrangement of the parts composing the invention is new and will
produce a new and useful result.
Such a patentee may doubtless invoke the doctrine of equivalents
as against an infringer of the patent, but the term "equivalent,"
as applied to such an invention, is special in its signification
and somewhat different from what is meant when the term is applied
to an invention consisting of a new device or an entirely new
machine.
Pressure in a machine may be produced by a spring or by a
weight, and where that is so, the one is a mechanical equivalent of
the other. Cases arise also where a rod and an endless chain will
produce the same effect in a machine, and where that is so, the
constructor, in operating under the patent, may substitute the one
for the other and still claim the protection which the patent
confers. Exactly the same function in certain cases may be
accomplished by a lever or by a screw, and where that is so, the
substitution of the one for the other cannot be regarded as
invention.
Patentees of an invention consisting merely of a combination of
old ingredients are entitled to equivalents, by which is meant that
the patent in respect to each of the respective ingredients
comprising the invention covers every other ingredient which, in
the same arrangement of the parts, will perform the same function,
if it was well known as a proper substitute for the one described
in the specification at the date of the patent. Hence it follows
that a party who merely substitutes another old ingredient for one
of the ingredients of the patented combination is an infringer if
the substitute performs the same function as the ingredient for
which it is so substituted and it appears that it was well known at
the date of the patent that it was adaptable to that use.
Gill v. Wells,
22 Wall. 1, 28.
Due process was issued against the present respondent and two
others, to-wit, Theodore Hahn and Charles Keinath, all of whom were
duly served, but the respondent last named never filed an answer,
and submitted to a decree
pro confesso. Both of the other
respondents appeared and jointly answered, setting up two principal
defenses: 1. That the complainant was not the original and first
inventor of the improvement. 2. They deny in their answer that they
have in any manner infringed
Page 101 U. S. 657
the patent of the complainant, or ever invaded any of his
rights, as alleged in the bill of complaint.
Proofs were taken, the parties heard, and the circuit court
having overruled both defenses, sent the cause to a master to
ascertain what amount the complainant was entitled to recover.
Hearing was had before the master, and he made a report, as
required by the decretal order. Exceptions were filed by the
respondents, who were again heard before the circuit court in
support of their motion to set aside the master's report.
Modifications of an important character were made by the circuit
court in the report of the master, both in respect to the amount
adjudged to the complainant and in respect to the portions to be
paid by the respective respondents, the decree being that the
complainant do recover of the three respondents the sum of $1,961;
and also against the first two in the sum of $3,748.28, with
interest and costs, as therein specified.
Seasonable appeal was taken by the first named respondent, and
since the appeal was entered here he has filed the following
assignment of errors: 1. that the circuit court erred in holding
that the patent of the complainant is good and valid; 2. that the
circuit court erred in holding that the respondents have infringed
the claims of the complainant's patent.
Patented time detectors for watchmen were known in the art prior
to the date of the patent described in the bill of complaint, and
it appears that the complainant, at a certain period anterior to
that date, became the owner of such a patent, and that he
surrendered the same, and that it was reissued in his name for the
then unexpired portion of the term. Certain alterations were made
in the specification of the reissue, and, as there described, the
invention provided a watch for the watchman, which he carried with
him in his rounds, so constructed that, by the insertion of a key
kept at each of the stations he was required to visit, he could
make a record within the watch indicating the several stations
visited, with the precise time of each visit, and the order in
which the respective visits were made. Each watch was provided with
a lock, so that the watchman had no access to its interior, and as
the record of each station could only be made by the peculiar key
that belonged to such station, which was there made fast, the
Page 101 U. S. 658
watchman could not deceive his employers by making a false
record.
All these several functions were effected by using a watch or
small portable clock movement enclosed in a strong case, the lid of
which could be locked and the key kept by the employer. Like a
watch, it had an arbor upon which the hour hand was placed, and a
drum was attached so as to revolve as the hour hand revolved, the
purpose of which was to carry the roll of paper to receive the
marks indicating the time of each visit. By marks on the paper, it
was divided into spaces corresponding in their position, relatively
as respects the centre of the watch, to the hours and minutes of
the watch dial, and by lines drawn lengthwise it was also divided
into spaces corresponding in number to the number of markers to be
used in effecting the patented result.
Exterior to the watch movement, but within the case there were
placed small steel bars or springs, terminating each in a point
bent at right angles, while the other end was fixed firmly to the
circular plate or frame of the watch movement. These springs were
placed and held in a gang, one above another, so that the points
were in a row perpendicular to the watch face, at and exterior to
the point on the dial of the watch indicating the hour of twelve,
and each point was directly opposite one of the longitudinal spaces
in the strip of paper around the circumference of the drum.
What the inventor desired to accomplish was to show the exact
time of each visit of the watchman, and it is obvious that if the
point of one of the springs is pressed inward upon the revolving
drum, it will perforate the paper within its proper longitudinal
division, and that the perforation will show the hour and minute at
which it was made, and in order to permit such perforation without
injuring the steel point, the periphery of the drum was channeled
by narrow longitudinal grooves beneath each of the spaces in the
paper placed around the drum to receive the marks. Keys were also
provided varying from each other in the location and width of the
bit and in the number of the bits, so that when one was inserted in
the key hole contiguous to the steel spring and turned, it would
press one of the springs inward upon the paper and make the
required
Page 101 U. S. 659
perforation, while another would press two springs and make two
perforations, another three, and so on, as more fully set forth in
the specification.
Buerk v. Valentine, 9 Blatchf. 479.
Since the term of that patent expired, the complainant has
obtained a patent for the invention in controversy in this case,
which, as he admits, is for the same purpose as the other, but
which he insists is a valuable improvement in accomplishing the
purpose for which both inventions were made. In its main features
the new improvement consists in dispensing with the drum entirely
and the paper wound around its circumference. Instead of that, it
attaches a circular disk to the arbor of the hour hand to revolve
therewith, and attaches thereto a circular flat paper dial of
larger diameter divided by vertical lines, corresponding with the
hours and minutes of a watch dial, and having a portion of its
exterior divided into spaces by circular lines drawn at uniform
distances, and corresponding to the location of certain steel
points as the paper disk is revolved. Beneath the circular plate
forming the support or frame of the watch movement the gang of
steel bars or springs is firmly attached to the plate in such
position that the points are in a straight line radial to the
centre, and over each point is a hole in the plate so that each can
be pushed upward, the point thereof passing through the hole
sufficiently to perforate the paper dial in the space corresponding
to the point of the spring. Over the row of holes is placed a small
strip of metal, called a fixed index, which is fastened to the
circular plate or frame of the watch, and extends towards the
center of the disk, and is raised sufficiently above the revolving
disk to permit the paper dial to revolve freely under it and over
the holes through which the spring points are to rise, and to
prevent injury to these points, holes are made in its under surface
opposite each point, into which the points as they rise may enter,
and then, by the power of the spring, be withdrawn to their
respective positions below the plate. Devices, called keys, of a
like character to those used in the prior invention, are provided,
to be inserted in a key hole so located that the bit of the keys
when turned will force the springs upwards instead of inwards, as
in the other apparatus previously explained. Perforations are made
by the combination in the exterior portion of the revolving
Page 101 U. S. 660
paper dial, which indicate the precise hour and minute when it
was made, and the particular key that was employed, with all the
variations accomplished by the devices described in the
specification of the prior patent.
Attempt is made in argument to support the first assignment of
error chiefly by reference to three exhibits introduced in evidence
by the respondents, which were known and used by the public prior
to the date of the patent described in the bill of complaint. They
are the patent of Schwilgue, the patent of Rowbotham, and the
patent of Nolet.
Before entering upon a separate examination of these several
patents, it is proper to remark that it is not pretended that any
one of them embodies the entire invention secured to the
complainant in his letters patent. Nothing of the kind is
pretended, but it is insisted that each contains some feature,
device, or partial mode of operation corresponding in that
particular to the corresponding feature, device, or partial mode of
operation exhibited in the complainant's patent.
Suppose that is so, still it is clear that such a concession
cannot benefit the respondent, it being conceded that neither of
the exhibits given in evidence embodies the complainant's invention
or the substance of the apparatus described and claimed in his
specification. Where the thing patented is an entirety, consisting
of a single device or combination of old elements incapable of
division or separate use, the respondent cannot escape the charge
of infringement by alleging or proving that a part of the entire
invention is found in one prior patent, printed publication, or
machine, and another part in another prior exhibit, and still
another part in a third exhibit, and from the three or any greater
number of such exhibits draw the conclusion that the patentee is
not the original and first inventor of the patented improvement.
Bates v. Coe, 98 U. S. 31,
98 U. S. 48.
Authority is given to a defendant in an action at law or to a
respondent in an equity suit to plead or set up in the answer that
the patentee is not the original or first inventor of the
improvement; but if the plaintiff or complainant introduces his
patent in evidence, the burden is cast upon the defending party to
prove his defense, which he may do by showing that the
Page 101 U. S. 661
thing patented had been invented or discovered by some other
person in this country prior to the alleged invention in the
pending suit, or that it had been patented or described in some
printed publication in this or any foreign country. Rev.Stat., sec.
4920.
Apply that rule to the facts of the case, and it is clear to a
demonstration that neither of the exhibits given in evidence by the
respondents constitutes any defense to the charge contained in the
bill of complaint. Curtis, Patents (4th ed.), sec. 98.
Similarities may doubtless be shown between certain features of
the apparatus invented by Schwilgue and the apparatus patented to
the complainant, as contended by the respondents; but they utterly
fail to point out the differences, except in one or two
particulars. They differ not only in construction, but in the mode
of operation, and in almost every particular which gives value to
the device as a time detector for watchmen, the foreign patent
being much more cumbrous and inconvenient than that of the
complainant. Stationary detectors were employed at an early period
to secure fidelity in watchmen in making the rounds of their beat
in factories or other business establishments. Detectors of the
kind were soon followed by portable watch movements which were
carried by the watchman, on which he stamped with ink or other
coloring matter the proof of his visit to the several rooms within
his beat. Enough appears to show that the patent of Rowbotham was
nothing more than an improved apparatus of that class, being
evidently so unlike that of the complainant as not to deserve much
examination.
Nor is it necessary to enter much into detail in disposing of
the other exhibit introduced by the respondents, as it evidently
belongs to the same class of detectors as the preceding, and bears
little or no relation to the apparatus of the complainant.
Argument to show that the present apparatus of the complainant
is substantially different from that described in the expired
patent cannot be required, as the comparison already given is amply
sufficient to prove that difference to every one not blinded by
self interest or prejudice. Tested by these considerations, it is
plain that nothing remains for re examination but the question of
infringement.
Page 101 U. S. 662
Persons seeking redress for the unlawful use of their inventions
must allege and prove that they or those under whom they claim are
the original and first inventors of the improvement, and that the
patent for the same has been infringed by the party against whom
the suit is brought. Where the patent in suit is introduced in
evidence, it affords a
prima facie presumption that the
invention is new and useful, but the burden to prove infringement
never shifts if the charge is denied in the plea or answer.
Sufficient proof of infringement may be derived from the comparison
of that which is used by the defending party with the description
of the invention given in the specification of the patent which
constitutes the foundation of the suit, and where the invention is
embodied in a machine or apparatus, that mode of conducting the
examination is usually the most satisfactory. Sufficient
explanations of the complainant's patent have already been given,
which need not be repeated.
None, it is presumed, will deny that the time detector sold by
the respondents is in appearance and general construction similar
to that described in the specification of the complainant. Beyond
all doubt, the respondents employ a watch movement with a series of
keys and a single hole, together with a revolving dial fastened to
the watch arbor. Like the complainant they dispense with the hour
and minute hands of the watch, and attach the false or paper
revolving dial to the arbor of the apparatus. Their stationary
index is exactly the same as that of the complainant, and they also
employ a series of markers arranged radially to the centre of the
dial; but the markers are unyielding, while the index is so
constructed as to enable the markers to perform the same function
as those employed in the complainant's apparatus. They arrange
their markers under the false dial, and place the yielding index
over the back of the false dial, so that the marks are made from
the inside instead of from the outside.
Expert testimony was taken by the complainant, and his witness
testified that the apparatus of the respondents is substantially
the same in construction and mode of operation as that described in
the complainant's specification, and gave his reasons for the
conclusion in substance and effect as follows:
Page 101 U. S. 663
that the arrangement of the markers is in a line radiating from
the centre, the markers being made stationary, so that instead of
pressing against the keys while the index supports the paper, the
keys, supported by the stationary index, press the paper against
the markers; the faces of the markers, instead of being simple
points, form what is called small figures, and the divisions of the
paper dial, by concentric circles, is omitted, it appearing that
the different figures are made to indicate the different stations,
but the arrangement of the gang of markers is preserved. It is
denied by the respondents that the index in their apparatus yields,
but the witness testifies that by taking a sight over the edge of
the case parallel to the dial when the watch is open, the
stationary index is seen to yield, and acts as a spring. Taken as a
whole, he regards the marking device as substantially similar to
that employed by the complainant.
Unless there is some yielding, either of the markers or the
index, it is not easy to see how the key could be turned without
tearing the paper or breaking the key, from which it must follow,
as contended by the complainant, that the respondents have
substituted for his series of yielding spring points and index a
series of permanent or unyielding markers and a yielding index,
retaining the other necessary elements of a false dial which shall
receive the impressions by the use of the described keys.
Differences between the two arrangements undoubtedly exist, as
is usually the case where one is borrowed from the other without
consent. Most or all of those differences are well described by the
circuit judge in the case to which reference has already been made.
Speaking of the infringing apparatus, he says that the gang of
steel springs, instead of being placed beneath the circular plate
or frame of the watch movement, is attached to the lid of the case
of the instrument, immediately over the location of the gang of
springs in the complainant's detector. When closed, the line or row
of points is in the same straight line radially from the centre,
and in order to perforate the paper dial they must be pressed
downward instead of upward. To that end, the keyhole is placed in
the side of the lid over the gang of springs instead of being
placed in the body of the case below the springs. Instead of the
fixed index placed
Page 101 U. S. 664
over the holes through which the points rise to perforate the
paper, the respondents have in the same location a row of holes in
the plate or frame of the movement, into which the points enter, to
protect them from injury when making the perforations. During the
act of perforation, the paper in the complainant's apparatus is
sustained by the fixed index, but the necessity for that in the
infringing apparatus is obviated by making the motion of the
springs downward, whereby the plate of the watch performs the same
function during such act.
Other minor differences exist in the manner the paper disk is
attached to the revolving disk which is fastened to the arbor of
the watch movement, but they are not deemed to be of the substance
of the infringed invention. Examples are also produced as exhibits
where are shown watch dial hands on the detector of the respondents
which do not appear on the apparatus of the complainant; but that
is a matter not supposed to be included in the infringed
patent.
Suffice it to say, without entering further into the comparison
of the two specifications, that we are all of the opinion that the
charge of infringement is fully sustained, both by the comparison
of the specifications, one with the other, and by the proofs
exhibited in the transcript.
Exceptions were taken to the master's report; but the rulings of
the court in respect to the amount adjudged the complainant for the
infringement not having been assigned for error, are not the proper
subject of re examination.
Buerk v. Imhaeuser, 14 Blatchf.
19.
Decree affirmed.
