American Can Co. v. Hickmott Asparagus Canning Co.

Citations

• 137 F. 86
• 1905 U.S. App. LEXIS 5202

Syllabus

<p>•1. Patents—Infringement—Combination Claims.</p> <p>In a combination claim of a patent, every element specified by the patentee, either directly or by a reference to the specification, which carries. such element into the claim, must be deemed material; and to constitute an infringement of such claim the infringing device must contain every one of its elements, or its equivalent.</p> <p>[Ed. Note.—For cases in point, see vol. 38, Cent. Dig. Patents, §§ 376, 387.)</p> <p>2. Same—Equivalents.</p> <p>A device in one mechanism, to be the equivalent of the device in another, must perform the same function and perform it in substantially the same manner.</p> <p>[Ed. Note.—For eases in point, see vol. 38, Cent. Dig. Patents, § 24.)</p> <p>8. Same—Pioneer Inventions—Identity op Means.</p> <p>To sustain a claim of infringement of a patented machine, three things must be found: First, identity of result; second, identity of means; third, identity of operation. The fact that an invention is of a primary character does not entitle the patentee to all means for accomplishing the same result.</p> <p>[Ed. Note.—For cases in point, see vol. 38, Cent. Dig. Patents, §§ 370-381.)</p> <p>4. Same—Can Making and Soldering Machines.</p> <p>Neither the Jordan patent, No. 436,792, for a can body malting machine, the Norton patent, No. 365,316, for a can cap soldering machine, nor the Holden and Brown patent, No. 598,567, for a can- body machine, is infringed by the machine of the Eldridge patent, No. 712,998, for a can body forming machine.</p>