Lewis Blind Stitch Mach. Co. v. Premium Mfg. Co.

Citations

• 163 F. 950
• 90 C.C.A. 310
• 1908 U.S. App. LEXIS 4593

Syllabus

<p>1. Patents — Double Use.</p> <p>The application of a device to a new use, that is so closely related to a prior one that the applicability of the device to the new use would occur to a person of ordinary mechanical skill, is only a case of double use, and does not involve invention.</p> <p>[Ed. Note. — For cases in point, see Cent. Dig. vol. 38, Patents, §§ 16, 17, 31, 32.]</p> <p>2. Same — Monopoly Not Aeeected by Nonuses.</p> <p>A patentee is under no obligation, during the life of his monopoly, to use or place upon the market a device or machine embodying his invention.</p> <p>[Ed. Note. — For eases in point, see Cent. Dig. vol. 38, Patents, § 268.]</p> <p>3. Same — Equivalents.</p> <p>A patent for an invention, which is neither primary nor a slight improvement on the prior art, but possesses substantial- patentable novelty, covers a reasonable range of equivalents.</p> <p>[Ed. Note. — For eases in point, see Cent. Dig. vol. 38, Patents, §§ 24, 43.]</p> <p>4. Same — Interpretation.</p> <p>In interpreting the claims of a patent, proper regard should be had to the natural import of the terms in question, the context and the specification.</p> <p>[Ed. Note. — For cases in point, see Cent. Dig. vol. 38, Patents, § 241.]</p> <p>5. Same — Invention—Infringement—Blind Stltoh Sewing Machines.</p> <p>Oí the Lewis patents No. 731,695, No. 731,696, and No. 746,853, claims' 1, 3, 11 to 17 inclusive, 21 and 22 of the first patent are held invalid l'or want of patentable novelty; claims 2, 4, 18, 19 and 20 of that patent are held valid and infringed; claims 1 and 2 of the second patent are held not infringed; claim 2 of the third patent is held infringed, and elaims 8 and 9 of that patent are held not infringed.</p> <p>(Syllabus by the Court.)</p>