1. Claims 1, 8, 9, 11, 12, 14, 16, and 19 of reissued letters
patent No. 2224, granted April 10, 1866, to Reuben Hoffheins for an
"improvement in Harvesters," the original, No. 35,316, having been
granted to him May 20, 1862, and claims 1, 2, 6, 7, and 9 of
reissued letters patent No. 2490, granted Feb. 19, 1867, to him,
for an "improvement in harvesters," the original, No. 40,481,
having been granted to him Nov. 3, 1863, and reissued in two
divisions, one, No. 1888, Feb. 28, 1865, and the other, No. 2102,
Nov. 7, 1866, and No. 2490 having been issued on the surrender of
No. 2102, considered, and the difference between the specifications
and the drawings of No. 35,315 and those of No. 2224, and that
between the raking apparatus and rake support of No. 2224 and those
of the defendants pointed out.
2. There is no warrant in No. 85,315 for locating the rake
support, or any part of it, on the finger beam, and as each of the
above-named claims of No. 2224 has, as an element, either a rake,
or a rake and reel, mounted on or attached to the cutting apparatus
or the finger beam, No. 35,315 could not lawfully be reissued with
those claims.
3. The defendants devised a new arrangement of rake, which made
it possible to mount a rake support on the heel of the finger beam,
where the rake support of No. 2224 could not be mounted. The
difference between the yielding belt tightener of No. 2224 and
their arrangement for driving the
Page 107 U. S. 133
raking apparatus pointed out, and the latter held not to be a
mechanical equivalent for the former.
4. No. 40,481 negatives the idea of mounting the rake post on
the finger beam, while an element in claim 1 of No. 2490 is the
mounting of the raking mechanism on the finger beam. In No. 2490, a
driver's seat mounted on the main frame, so as to enable the driver
to ride on the machine while the rake is in operation, is an
element in claims 1 and 9, while the driver's seat in No. 40,481 is
not, and cannot be, in such a position that the driver can ride on
the seat while the rake is in operation.
5. The raking apparatus is an element in claims 2, 7, and 9 of
No. 2490, and in view of the differences between the two machines
in the construction of the raking mechanism and the arrangement and
location of the rake post, the rake of claims 2, 7, and 9 is to be
construed to be such a rake, and one so arranged, on a rake post so
mounted, as is shown and described in the specification, and thus
does not include the defendants' raking mechanism or rake post.
6. The driving device in claims 6 and 7 of No. 2490 held not to
include the defendants' driving device, the former being an
extensible tumbling shaft and the latter a chain belt with open
links, and patentability or invention inhering only in the device
and not in its location.
7. No cause of action is established against the defendants on
either of the patents sued on.
The facts are stated in the opinion of the Court.
MR. JUSTICE BLATCHFORD delivered the opinion of the Court.
This suit is brought for the infringement of two reissued
letters patent granted to the appellant. One, No. 2,224, was issued
April 10, 1866, for an "improvement in harvesters," the original
patent, No. 35,315, having been issued to him May 20, 1862. The
other, No. 2,490, was issued February 19, 1867, for an "improvement
in harvesters," the original patent, No. 40,481, having been issued
to him November 3, 1863, and reissued in two divisions, one, No.
1,888, February 28, 1865, and the other, No. 2,102, November 7,
1865, and No. 2,490 having been issued on the surrender of No.
2,102.
No. 2,224 contains nineteen claims, and No. 2,490 contains
Page 107 U. S. 134
nine claims. In No. 2,224 claims 1, 8, 9, 11, 12, 14, 16, and
19, and in No. 2,490 claims 1, 2, 6, 7, and 9, are alleged to have
been infringed. The circuit court rendered a decree that the
appellees had not infringed any invention of which the appellant
was the original and first inventor, recited in the two reissues
sued on; that No. 2,224 "contains inventions different from that
contained" in No. 35,315; that No. 2,490 contains inventions
different from that embraced in No. 40,481; that the said reissues
respectively are therefore void, and that the bill be dismissed.
From this decree this appeal is taken.
In No. 2,224 the claims in question are these:
"1. A sweep rake which is mounted upon the heel of the finger
beam proper, or upon the inner front corner of the platform of a
harvester which has its cutting apparatus and platform hinged to
the draft frame, all in such manner that the rake arm sweeps the
platform from front to inner side and maintains a correct position
in relation to the finger beam and platform during the rising or
falling movements thereof on the joint or joints by which the
finger beam is connected to the draft frame, substantially as set
forth."
"8. In a harvesting machine which has its cutting apparatus
hinged or jointed to the main frame in such manner as to allow it
to conform at both ends to the undulations of the ground and a rake
mounted upon the said cutting apparatus, or upon the platform
thereof, I claim so constructing and arranging the several parts
that the support of the rake can occupy a position outside of the
inner drive wheel B or a position which is between the point of
suspension
h and the outer divider G, and can also be hung
or be suspended below the draft frame, substantially as
described."
"9. Effecting a combination of a rake and reel located
substantially as described, and a finger beam and platform, with
the main frame, by means of a hinged draw bar
b and hinged
brace I or hinged suspender
f and an extension bracket 2,
or their equivalents, substantially as and for the purposes
described."
"11. Preventing a too sudden or abrupt deflection of a rake and
reel mounted upon a hinged joint cutting apparatus by carrying the
point of suspension beyond the rake support toward the center of
the draft frame, by means substantially as described."
"12. A continuously revolving
Page 107 U. S. 135
rake, which is mounted directly and wholly upon the platform or
finger beam so as to rise and fall therewith independently of the
draft frame, when said rake is located between the center of the
draft frame and the outer divider, and passes in at the front of
the machine upon the platform and sweeps around to the inner side
of the platform, substantially as described."
"14. The combination of a suspended hinge joint cutting
apparatus of harvesters and a combined rake and reel which is
mounted directly and wholly upon the suspended platform or hinged
finger beam, substantially as and for the purpose described."
"16. The combination of a combined rake and reel, mounted upon a
hinged joint cutting apparatus, and a yielding belt tightener,
substantially as and for the purpose described."
"19. Providing, in a harvester with the rake attached to its
hinged finger beam or platform, an extensible means for driving the
rake, which will permit the platform and rake to rise and fall
together and accommodate themselves independently of the draft
frame to the undulations of the ground, substantially as described
and for the purpose set forth."
The original patent, No. 35,315, in stating what the invention
is, says that it consists of certain improvements "in the manner of
mounting and operating a revolving rake." There were three features
set forth in the specification of No. 35,315: 1. the peculiar
construction of the reel and rake; 2. the peculiar form and
location of the rake post; 3. the peculiar manner of operating the
rakes. There were only three claims in No. 35,315, one covering
each of said three features, as follows:
"(1) A combined reel and rake, rotating upon a vertical axis,
and having its arms successively turned up into an inverted
position to pass over the main frame, substantially as
explained."
"(2) The inclined standard I, rigidly mounted upon a loosely
hinged platform, and employed to support a revolving reel and rake
in an unchangeable position in relation to the said platform,
without obstructing the free motion of the latter."
"(3) The yielding and swiveled rod Q, operating in combination
with the band P and pulleys O and R, in the manner and for the
purposes herein shown and explained."
A copy of the model filed in the Patent Office with the
Page 107 U. S. 136
original application for No. 35,315 is in evidence. The
invention shown in the specification of No. 35,315 consists in
general terms in mounting a rake upon a quadrant shaped platform,
said platform being hinged to the frame of a two wheeled machine in
such manner that the raking arms will maintain at all times a
proper working position relatively to the surface of the platform
and at the same time receive motion from driving mechanism mounted
on the main frame, the result being accomplished by constructing
the raking apparatus in a peculiar manner and mounting it in a
peculiar manner upon the platform of the machine, and also by
connecting the driving mechanism of the rake with the driving
mechanism on the main frame by a belt mounted in a peculiar manner
so that the varying changes in the position of the platform and the
raking apparatus relatively to the main frame and the gearing
therein will not affect the driving mechanism of the rake. The
specification says:
"D is a segmental platform, provided with a divider E at its
outer end and resting upon a roller
e. F is a draw bar
connected at front by a universal joint to the frame A and attached
at back to a shoe
f, upon which the inner side of the
platform may rest. G is a lateral brace rod, hinged at one end
beneath the right hand rear corner of the main frame, and at the
other to the draw bar F or shoe
f. H is a link by which
the inner end of the platform is suspended from the back of the
main frame."
This language describes the parts which relate to the platform
and the devices by which it is attached to the main frame and by
which it is permitted to vary its movement relatively to the main
frame to conform to the unevenness of the ground, and there is
nothing else on the subject in the text of the specification. In
the drawings of No. 35,315, the suspending link H, by which the
inner side of the platform is suspended from the main frame so as
to keep it on a level with the wheel at the outer shoe at the
opposite side of the platform, is attached at its lower end to an
arm which extends out from the platform nearly to, but short, of,
the middle of the width of the tread of the left hand driving wheel
B, but the drawing represents the central line of the link H as in
the vertical plane of the left hand edge of the tread of the wheel
B, so as to put the point of
Page 107 U. S. 137
suspension in a vertical line with the left hand edge of the
tread of the wheel B. The model referred to shows the link as being
suspended at a point on the frame to the right of the vertical
plane of the left hand edge of the tread of the wheel, but not to
the right of the vertical plane of the middle of the width of the
tread. In the reissue, great stress is laid upon this point of
suspension. In the specification of the reissue, it is said:
"From the inner corner of the finger beam or platform, or from
the metal foot piece of the rake and reel support, by which the
support is screwed to and braced on the platform and finger beam, a
strong bracket, 2, is extended beyond the left hand side beam of
the draft frame. To the extremity of this arm a swinging link or
chain
f is loosely connected or jointed, as at
g,
and by means of this link or chain the finger beam, platform, and
rake, though arranged at the left of the left hand drive wheel B,
can be suspended from a point which is to the right of the said
left hand side beam. The suspension is effected by hanging the
upper end of the link or chain to the rear beam of the draft frame,
as represented at
h."
In the drawings of the reissue, the point of suspension of the
link is located a little to the right of the vertical plane of the
middle of the width of the tread of the left hand driving wheel,
and the arm or bracket to which the lower end of the link is
attached extends to a point beyond, and at the right hand of the
middle of the width of such tread. In the specification of No.
35,315, the word "finger beam" is not found, nor is a finger beam
described in it or shown in the drawings.
As to the method of mounting the rake, the specification of No.
35,315 says:
"I is a post rigidly secured to the inner side of the platform,
and inclining over the rear of the main frame;
i is a
brace rod extending from the draw bar to the said post to support
the latter at top; J is a box mounted on the top of the post I, and
constituting the bearing in which the disk K rotates. The rakes or
reel arms L, L' are mounted in couples upon the ends of horizontal
shafts M M', which are journaled at right angles across the
rotating disk K."
This is all that is found in that specification as to the
location of the axis of the rake. On the other hand, the
specification of the reissue says:
"Figure 9 is a rear elevation of a portion of the machine,
showing
Page 107 U. S. 138
the manner of suspending the rake and reel support upon the
hinge joint finger beam or platform thereof."
The drawings of the reissue show a finger beam, and it is
lettered, and referred to by letter in the text. The specification
of the reissue further says:
"It is also important to have the suspension of the rake made in
such a manner that the base of the support of the axis of the rake
is wholly upon the hinged finger beam or the platform thereof, and
also that the rake, the finger beam, and the platform shall be
rigidly connected together."
Here the word "finger beam" is again introduced as important in
connection with the support of the axis of the rake. The expert for
the defendants states that the drawings of No. 35,315 show the base
of the support of the rake so far back, or to the rear of the front
edge of the platform, that it cannot, in his opinion, be brought in
contact with the finger beam without changing its locality very
materially, or the mode of its construction or attachment. But the
specification of the reissue says:
"D is the finger beam and E the platform of the harvester, the
cutting apparatus and guard fingers being left off. F is a support
for a combined rake and reel. This support is mounted rigidly upon
the inner front corner of the platform and heel of the finger beam,
but it may be mounted either wholly on the finger beam or wholly on
any part of the platform, which is to the left of the left hand
drive wheel B or to the right of said drive wheel if it is a
right-hand machine."
There is no warrant in the original patent for locating the rake
support, or any part of it, on the finger beam.
As to claim 1 of the reissue, the finger beam is made an element
of the combination, while in the specification and drawings of No.
35,315 there is no reference to a finger beam. Moreover, the raking
apparatus of the appellant is so constructed that when one of the
arms has descended to force the grain toward the platform and to
sweep across the platform, the opposite arm must be raised to such
a point as to clear the wheel of the machine. The arms are in
pairs, and the motion of one arm of a pair is controlled by the
motion and operation of the opposite arm of that pair. The
inclination of the two to each other is such that when one is
sweeping across the platform, the other forms an exactly opposite
angle to the axis
Page 107 U. S. 139
on which they both revolve. Therefore the support of the rakes
must be so mounted that they can descend to the grain at the proper
point in front of the cutters to press in the grain and sweep
across the platform form and deliver the gavels and then rise out
of the way of the frame. To effect this, the point of vibration of
the pair of arms must be raised so high and carried over toward the
frame so far, that the descending arm may reach its proper position
to do its work, while the other arm of that pair shall clear the
frame in rising. Therefore, the support of the raking apparatus was
required to be of such form and character, and so placed relatively
to the platform and frame, that one arm of a pair would not
interfere with the working of the other arm of the same pair. Now
the arms of the raking apparatus are diametrical arms, the centers
of which are axes mounted on a horizontal head, which head is so
fastened on a vertical shaft that, the opposite ends of the arms
being inclined to the axis of rotation, one end of one arm will
descend and sweep across the platform, while the other will be
carried in an exactly opposite direction, with its rake teeth
turned up, while the teeth of its opposite arm are turned down. In
such an arrangement, the bearing point or axis of rotation of the
arms must be carried up a considerable distance above the platform
and reach over in a diagonal direction from the front edge of the
cutters to the delivery edge of the platform, so that the rake at
its end next the base of the rake support may be brought close
enough to the platform to do its work. Hence the inclined post of
No. 35,315, described as so inclined and thus claimed in claim 2 of
that patent. But in the specification of the reissue, though the
drawings show the same sort of inclined post or standard, it is
said:
"From the platform or finger beam, the support may extend in an
inclined position as high as the top of the draft frame, and then
take a turn over toward the center of said frame, as represented so
as to form a support for the rake and reel which shall be somewhat
higher than the frame and between the two drive or supporting
wheels. The particular shape and height of this support is not very
material so long as the base of it is affixed at some point between
the center of the main frame A and the outer shoe or divider
G."
The special kind of support
Page 107 U. S. 140
described and shown in the patents, original and reissued, is
essential to the operation of the special kind of raking apparatus
there described. But the appellees' machine has a raking apparatus
differently organized. In it, each arm moves independently of every
other arm, the arms are not coupled in pairs, and each does its
work without reference to the movement of any other. Therefore it
is unnecessary to raise the supporting point of the rake arms to
any considerable height, or to carry it over to a location between
the drive wheels, and in the appellees' machine, the pivot on which
the rakes revolve is at a considerable distance toward the outer
shoe and is not all between the drive wheels. The appellees' sweep
rake is not substantially such a sweep rake as is referred to in
claim 1 of the reissue, nor is it mounted in such a manner as to
perform the functions of the appellant's rake. The rake post in the
appellees' machine is vertical and not inclined, and is mounted on
the shoe or inner end of the finger beam.
In analyzing the two machines in view of the state of the art,
it appears that the appellant adapted a continuously revolving
gathering and discharging rake to a two-wheeled loosely jointed
finger bar machine. To do this, he employed a peculiar rake and a
peculiar rake support. The appellees employ an entirely different
rake. They have a series of radial arms pivoted each independently
of every other in a head, which has a double cam guideway for each
arm, and the arms are thereby elevated vertically so as not to
strike the frame in passing up. This makes it possible for the
appellees to place the support for their rake on the finger beam by
the side of the frame and in the line of the cutters, instead of
behind the frame. No such organization is possible with the
appellant's arrangement of rakes. The center of movement of his
rakes must be brought in line with the cutters by having an
inclined rake post, the base of which is not in a vertical line
with the line of the cutters. He shows no mode of placing the base
of the post on the finger beam. If it were placed there, with his
arrangement of rake arms, and his inclined post the center of
motion of the arms would be so far out of its proper position that
the arms would not do their work. Having independent radial arms,
the appellees can have a vertical and not an
Page 107 U. S. 141
inclined rake post, and can bring the center of motion of the
arms in a line with the cutters by mounting the vertical post on
the finger beam. They do this, and for that purpose they have a
bridge over the inner shoe of the finger beam for the foot of the
rake post to rest on, while at the same time the cutters can
vibrate under the bridge. The post is hollow, and supports the cam
guideway, and the vertical shaft which revolves the rakes passes up
in and through the hollow post. The appellees have not borrowed
from the appellant. They devised a new arrangement of rake which
made it possible for them to mount their rake support on the heel
of the finger beam proper, where the appellant can never mount his,
and where that of the appellees is mounted. The theory of the
reissue appears to be that as the original patent shows a special
device for supporting a special arrangement of rakes, such device
being located on a particular part of the platform other than, and
not possible to be, a part of the finger beam, he can claim in a
reissue any device for supporting a revolving rake, even one
located on the finger beam. To carry out this view, the word
"finger beam" is interpolated in the specification, in this
connection, as an addition to the word "platform," and the rake
post is described as being attached to the finger beam or the
platform. But there is an entire absence in the original
specification and in the reissued specification of any description
of any means by which the rake support can be attached to or
mounted on the finger beam, or by which the rakes can be made to
work with the rake support in that location, or by which the
connecting rod of the cutters can be free to work with the support
so placed. The law of reissues never at any time or under any
construction allowed that to be done which has been thus attempted
in this case.
The foregoing views apply also to claims 8, 9, 11, 12, 14, 16,
and 19, being all the other claims alleged to have been infringed,
and each of which has as an element either a rake or a rake and
reel mounted on or attached to the cutting apparatus or the finger
beam.
In the reissue, claim 2 is substantially the same as claim 1 of
the original, claim 5 (with the interpolation of the finger beam)
is intended to take the place of claim 2 of the original,
Page 107 U. S. 142
and claim 18 corresponds with claim 3 of the original. Yet the
appellees' machine is not alleged to infringe either claim 2, claim
5, or claim 18 of the reissue, nor does it embrace what was covered
by anyone of the three claims of the original. As to the yielding
belt tightener of the appellant, which is the subject of claim 3 of
the original patent and is an element in claim 16 of the reissue,
the appellees' machine does not employ any device which performs
the function of tightening a belt. It uses, to communicate motion
from the main axle to the raking apparatus, an old form of chain
belt, composed of square open links, connected by loops of metal
between the links, and the links arranged to run over sprocket
wheels, which have teeth on them corresponding to openings in the
links of the chain and which prevent the chain from slipping on the
wheels. As the links of the chain engage positively with the teeth
on the sprocket wheels, there is no need of a belt tightener, as no
slackness in the chain can interfere with the driving action. The
only function of the appellees' device which holds up, by a
yielding pressure, the under part of the chain belt, is to so guide
that part, when slack, that the teeth on the sprocket wheels may
readily enter the links of the chain. The appellant's belt could
not, in the same position, drive the raking apparatus so as to make
it work properly. The appellees, by the use of sprocket pulleys and
a chain, dispense with a tight friction band, and with a pulley
around which the platform vibrates, and with a tightening pulley.
Their arrangement is not an equivalent, in mechanism or functions,
for that of the appellant.
It is made an element of claim 11 of the reissue that the point
of suspension of the platform to the main frame is carried beyond
the rake support toward the center of the draft frame by means
described in the specification, so as to prevent a too sudden or
abrupt deflection of the rake and reel. The specification of the
reissue says that
"it is important that the great weight of the rake, finger beam,
and platform shall not cause the draft frame to tilt over on its
right hand drive wheels by sudden and abrupt motions, but shall
tend to insure a square run of the draft frame upon the ground
during the pitching or rising and falling motions of the finger
beam, platform, and rake, and thus
Page 107 U. S. 143
an even and easy draft for the beam be secured."
But the reissue shows the point of suspension of the platform to
the main frame as being nearly under the axis on which the rake
arms revolve, and said point is near the vertical plane of the
middle of the width of the tread of the drive wheel which is next
to the cutters, so that the inner end of the platform is subject to
all the vertical motions of such drive wheel. The point of
suspension being in the pathway of the wheel, the rising or falling
motion of the wheel must be communicated to that end of the cutters
which is next to such wheel. In the appellees' machine, the
suspension of the platform is made by an arm extending out from the
finger bar or inner shoe to a point about opposite the center of
the main frame, and which arm is there suspended by a chain to a
hook on the frame, so that the weight of the cutting apparatus and
rake and inner part of the platform is transferred to nearly a
center point between the drive wheels. The appellant's structure
shows no such organization, and does not involve what the appellees
have done. For the foregoing reasons, without considering the many
other questions raised in the case, it must be held that the
appellant has not established any cause of action against the
appellees on reissue No. 2,224.
In No. 2,490 the claims in question are these:
"1. The combination, in a two wheeled hinge joint machine, of a
driver's seat mounted upon the main frame, with a raking mechanism
mounted upon the finger beam, and rotating around a vertical axis,
or one nearly so, substantially in the meaner described, for the
purpose of enabling the driver to ride on the machine while the
rake is in operation."
"2. The combination, in a two wheeled hinge joint machine, of a
shoe with a hinged joint in it with a rake and platform having an
extension
J2 and with a draft frame which sustains the
weight of the cutting apparatus and raking apparatus, with platform
attached at a point between the two drive wheels."
"6. Driving a revolving rake, or a combined revolving rake and
reel, which move about a vertical or nearly vertical axis, by a
device arranged on the grain side of the inner drive wheel or inner
side of the draft frame."
"7. Making a direct driving connection
Page 107 U. S. 144
between a revolving rake, or a combined rake and reel, which
move about a vertical or nearly vertical axis, and the inner end of
the main frame axle of the draft frame."
"9. The combination of a quadrant platform, hinged finger beam,
revolving rake, and a driver's seat supported by the main
frame."
The original patent, No. 40,481, says that the improvements
covered by it consist 1st, in a peculiar construction and
combination of frame, gearing, and double driving wheels; 2d, in a
device for affording protection to the main crankshaft and
strengthening the main frame; 3d, in the use of a movable tongue;
4th in a device for permitting the finger beam to turn freely on
its own axis. There were only four claims in No. 40,481, one
covering each of said four features, as follows:
"1. The main frame and gear frame A A, constructed as described,
open at each end, when used in combination with shafts, gearing,
and double driving wheels, arranged and operating substantially as
and for the purpose specified."
"2. The flange, a, cast or formed upon the gear frame for the
combined purpose of strengthening the latter and protecting the
crank shaft E, as hereinbefore explained."
"3. The movable tongues K, adapted to be attached to the frame
on either side of the wheel B' and employed to support or raise the
inner end of the beam."
"4. Attaching the shoe to the drag bar by a transverse swivel
joint, to permit the finger beam to turn its axis to elevate or
depress the joints of the fingers, or to fold the beam against the
frame for transportation, when combined with bracing guides
h', substantially as herein described."
Every one of the four claims of No. 40,481 -- the iron frame
cast in one piece, the flange, the movable tongue, and the
transverse swivel joint -- is omitted from the reissue, and there
are no corresponding claims. The rake support is of the same form
and in the same location as in No. 35,315, inclined and mounted on
the platform, and not on the finger beam, and the inner end of the
platform is suspended on the main frame in the same way as in No.
35,315. The specification of No. 40,481 says:
"On the inner side of the grain platform near the heel of the
finger beam is firmly mounted a post R, which may incline over
toward the main frame, as shown in figure 1."
This passage negatives the idea of mounting the post on the
Page 107 U. S. 145
finger beam, and draws a distinction between the platform and
the finger beam as a location for the attachment of the post. The
only mention of a driver's seat in No. 40,481 is this: "W
represents the driver's seat." In the specification of the reissue
the following language is found:
"My first improvement consists in the combination, in a two
wheeled hinged joint machine, of a driver's seat mounted upon the
main frame with a raking mechanism mounted upon the finger beam and
rotating on a vertical axis, or one nearly so, substantially as
hereinafter described, for the purpose of enabling the driver to
ride upon the machine while the rake is in operation."
Again, after describing the construction and arrangement of the
rake or reel arms, which are the same as in No. 35,315:
"By this means the rake and reel arms will stand high enough
above the draft frame on the inner side of the machine to move
clear of the driver, who sits upon the machine in a seat W, which
is mounted upon the main frame, as shown, or in any other position
on the frame that will give the greatest convenience and advantage
from his weight and use of his hands in the management of the
machine."
Again:
"From the foregoing description it will be seen that my
invention enables one to combine in a self-raking harvester all the
advantages derived from the two wheeled hinged joint machine, and
still use a rake that turns about an axis, or revolves entirely
about the same, and at the same time have the driver or manager
ride upon the main or draft frame in such a position that his
weight may aid in counterbalancing the weight of the rake and
platform, and his hands may be conveniently employed for
controlling the machine."
As to claim 1 of the reissue, although there is in No. 40,481 a
driver's seat mounted on the main frame, it is not in such a
position, nor can it be placed on the frame described in such a
position, that the driver can ride on the seat while the
appellant's rake is in operation. The appellees' raking apparatus
has been above described. The appellant's raking apparatus is like
that of No. 35,315 and of reissue No. 2,224. If the appellant's
raking apparatus were substituted in the appellees' machine for
their raking apparatus, no person could ride on the driver's seat
located anywhere on the frame of the appellees'
Page 107 U. S. 146
machine, as it is constructed, with the rake in operation. The
seat shown in the drawings of No. 2,490 is mounted on a portion of
the frame which extends to the rear of the main axle, and the seat
itself is shown as placed in the rear of said axle. Consequently a
driver located on said seat would add his weight on the same side
of the main axle on which the raking apparatus is mounted, so that
the idea of any counterbalancing weight from the position of the
driver is negatived by the arrangement. In the appellees' machine,
the organization of the raking mechanism, before described, is such
that the driver's seat may be located toward the front of the main
frame, where he cannot be struck by the rake arms and where his
weight will aid in counterbalancing that of the rake and the
platform. No such organization of raking mechanism is shown or
described in No. 2,490, nor any such arrangement of seat relatively
thereto. Moreover, claim 1 of No. 2,490 requires that the raking
mechanism be mounted on the finger beam. Such a construction is not
shown or described in No. 2,490, or in No. 40,481. The raking
apparatus in the appellees' machine is mounted directly on the
finger beam. The views hereinbefore expressed in connection with
No. 2,224 apply to No. 2,490 so far as the mounting of the rake
post on the finger beam and the arrangement of the raking mechanism
are concerned.
As to claim 2, the raking apparatus is made an element in it,
and the differences, before pointed out, between the two machines
in the construction of the raking mechanism and the arrangement and
location of the rake post lead to the conclusion that the rake
mentioned in claim 2 must be construed to be such a rake, and one
so arranged, on a rake post so mounted, as is shown and described
in the specification, and thus does not include the appellees'
raking mechanism or rake post.
As to claim 6, the driving device must be limited to one
substantially the same as that of the appellant. He has an
extensible tumbling shaft. The appellees have a chain belt, with
links, before described. Their arrangement requires that the axis
of the driving wheel and the driven wheel shall be substantially
parallel, while No. 2,490 requires that in the appellant's
structure the axis of the two wheels, or the ends of
Page 107 U. S. 147
the axes, shall incline toward each other at a considerable
angle. The tumbling shaft, if used, must be used in such a location
that the chain belt would not work in the same place. The two
devices are not mechanical equivalents for each other. One could
not be substituted for the other without a rearrangement of parts.
Their only resemblance is that both communicate motion. The place
where the device is arranged -- namely, as the claim says, on the
grain side of the inner drive wheel or inner side of the draft
frame -- imparts no patentable or inventive quality in this case.
That inheres only in the device.
In regard to claim 7, the appellant's raking apparatus and
driving device are elements in it, and the observations before made
apply, so that the appellees' raking apparatus and driving device
are not covered by this claim.
Claim 9 includes the rake and the driver's seat, and under the
views before stated, the appellees' machine cannot be held to
infringe that claim.
These conclusions make it unnecessary to consider any other
question.
Decree, insofar as it dismisses the bill, is
Affirmed.