Eames v. Worcester Polytechnic Institute

Citations

• 123 F. 67
• 60 C.C.A. 37
• 1903 U.S. App. LEXIS 3973

Syllabus

<p>1. Patents—Anticipation.</p> <p>A device which if later than that of a patent would infringe is an anticipation if earlier.</p> <p>2. Same—Change of Form.</p> <p>The fact that a simple element in a combination is made of one part instead of two, as in a prior combination, does not affect their substantial identity, or avoid anticipation, where each performs the same function and accomplishes the same result by means which are mechanically similar.</p> <p>8. Same—Invention—Extending Application of Old Device.</p> <p>The mere carrying forward or extending the application of a prior device with a change only in degree does not amount to invention.</p> <p>4. Same—Infringement—Twist Drill Grinding Machines.</p> <p>The Walker patent, No. 411,845, for a twist drill grinding machine, claim 1, which covers the combination of a drill rest with the holding mechanism, is void for lack of invention, in view of the prior art. Claims 2 and 6, which include as an element of the combinations therein described a screw-threaded axis of oscillation between the bracket carrying the holder and the other part of the machine, held to disclose invention as to such device, and to he valid, but not infringed.</p> <p>5. Same.</p> <p>The Walker patent, No. 425,839, for an improvement on the twist drill grinding machine of patent No. 411,845, claims 1 and 2, held valid. Claim 1 also held infringed, and claim 2 not infringed.</p> <p>¶ 3. See Patents, vol. 38, Cent. Dig. § 19.</p>