Chisholm, Boyd & White Co. v. Anderson Foundry & Machine Works

Citations

• 115 F. 738
• 1902 U.S. App. LEXIS 4965

Syllabus

<p>1. Patents — Anticipation—Brick Machine.</p> <p>The White and Boyd patent, No. 429,296, for a brick machine, claim 10, which relates to a stop mechanism to limit the descent of the plunger, but does not designate, either in the claim or specification, any particular location for the stop, was anticipated by the Brewis patent, No. 395,871.</p> <p>2. Same — Insufficiency of Description.</p> <p>The White patent, No. 455,374, for a brick-making machine, claim 17, covering a hopper having the function of being movable by gravity, but which does not describe nor claim the'means of constructing and making the same movable by gravity, is void for lack of invention. Glaim 23, relating to rods for connecting the oscillating arms to the feed box for the purpose of transmitting the reciprocating motion of the arms to the box, but which is not limited to any particular form of rods or pivotal connections, is void as attempting to claim a function without sufficiently describing the mechanical means by which the result is attained, as well as for lack of invention in view of the prior art</p> <p>8. Same.</p> <p>The White patent No. 488,622, for a brick machine, claims 16, 19, and 20, are void for lack of invention and anticipation.</p>