Gates Iron Works v. Fraser
Citations
- 153 U.S. 332
- 14 S. Ct. 883
- 38 L. Ed. 734
- 1894 U.S. LEXIS 2187
Syllabus
<p>The claims covered by letters patent No. 56,793, issued July 31, 1866, to Henry Pearce for “ a new and useful machine for crushing and pulverizing quartz-rock, stone, and any description of ores,” were not infringed by the machine made by the defendants, and were, in some respects, anticipated by the invention patented to Jonathan F. Ostrander by letters patent No. 4478, dated April 25,1846; by the invention patented to George H. Wood by letters patent No. 28,031, dated April 24, 1860; and by the invention patented to James W. Rutter by reissued letters patent No. 3633, dated September 7. 1869.</p> <p>The invention patented to Charles M. Brown by letters patent No. 201,646, dated March 26, 1878, for “ a new and useful improvement in ore-crushers,” was in its general features a reproduction of the machine patented to James W. Rutter by reissued letters patent No. 3633, dated September 7, 1869; and, in view of the prior patents to Rutter and Tripp, must receive a narrow construction, which frees the defendants from the charge of infringing them.</p> <p>The invention patented to George Raymond and Albert Raymond by letters patent No. 237,320, dated February 1, 1881, for “ improvements in grinding mills,” was for a combination which included several features not found in the machines made by the defendants.</p> <p>The function of the safety pin in letters patent No. 110,397, issued to John H. Rusk, December 20, 1870, and antedated December 9, 1870, is practically the same as that of the pin in the combination patented to George and Albert Raymond.</p> <p>The claim in letters patent No. 243,343, issued June 21, 1881, to Philetus W. Gates for the segmental cast-bearing for the ball of the socket joint, having a form which gives it a bearing contact upon the ball, was anticipated by machines constructed by Charles M. Brown and in public use more than two years before Gates applied for his patent.</p> <p>The claim in letters patent No. 243,545, issued June 28, 1881, to P
Judges: Shiras
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
13 cases in this archive cite this case.
- Lincoln Engineering Co. v. Stewart-Warner Corp.Supreme Court· 1938-03-28· cited 381×
- Edelstein v. United StatesEighth Circuit· 1906-11-30· cited 53×
- Sloan Filter Co. v. Portland Gold Min. Co.Eighth Circuit· 1905-06-22· cited 17×
- Photo Drama Motion Picture Co. v. Social Uplift Film Corp.S.D. New York· 1914-02-10· cited 14×
- Paulus v. M. M. Buck Mfg. Co.Eighth Circuit· 1904-03-28· cited 13×
- Fisher Governor Co. v. C. F. Camp Co.Tenth Circuit· 1930-04-14· cited 7×
- Birmingham Cement Manufacturing Co. v. Gates Iron WorksFifth Circuit· 1896-04-28· cited 5×
- Johnson v. ChisholmThird Circuit· 1902-04-02· cited 4×
- Gates Iron Works v. Overland Gold Min. Co.Eighth Circuit· 1906-09-03· cited 4×
- Handel Co. v. Jefferson Glass Co.N.D. West Virginia· 1920-05-01· cited 4×
- Dunlop Company, Limited v. Kelsey-Hayes CompanyE.D. Michigan· 1972-05-15· cited 3×
- Traylor Engineering & Mfg. Co. v. Worthington Pump & Machinery Co.Third Circuit· 1924-10-01· cited 2×
- Neptune Meter Co. v. National Meter Co.Third Circuit· 1904-01-28
Other cases named Gates Iron Works v. Fraser
2 other CourtListener records share this case name.
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.