Imhaeuser v. Buerk
Citation | 101 U.S. 647,25 L.Ed. 945 |
Parties | IMHAEUSER v. BUERK |
Decision Date | 01 October 1879 |
Court | United States Supreme Court |
APPEAL from the Circuit Court of the United States for the Southern District of New York.
This is a suit, commenced July 5, 1872, by Jacob E. Buerk against William Imhaeuser, Theodore Hahn, and Charles Keinath doing business as Imhaeuser & Co., for the alleged infringement by them of letters-patent No. 48,048, granted to him June 6, 1865, for an improvement in watchman's time detectors.
The drawings and specification of his letters are as follows: — 'No. 48,048.
'The Schedule referred to in these Letters-patent and making part of the same.
'To all whom it may concern:
'Be it known that I, Jacob E. Buerk, of Boston, in the county of Suffolk and State of Massachusetts, have invented a new and improved watchman's time detector, and I do hereby declare that the following is a full, clear, and exact description thereof, which will enable others skilled in the art to make and use the same, reference being had to the accompanying drawings forming a part of this specification, in which,——
'Figure 1 represents a face view of this invention.
'Figure 2 is a vertical central section of the same, the line x x, Figure 1, indicating the plane of section.
'Figure 3 is an inverted plan of the movement.
'Figure 4 is a face view of the same.
'Figure 5 is a diagram representing the keys necessary for the operation of this invention.
'Similar letters of reference indicate like parts.
'The spaces between the rings, c, correspond in number and position to a series of spring points, d, the points of which are situated under the index D, and made to project through a slot in the dial-plate B'. When left to follow their own elasticity, said spring points do not reach above the surface of the dialplate, but they are so arranged that one or more of them can be forced up simultaneously and made to penetrate the paper dial, different keys, K, being provided, each of which serves to raise one of said spring points, or of a combination of two or more of them.
'One of the keys is intended to be fastened by a chain or other suitable means to a post or other fixed part on each station in the beat of the watchman, and the watchman carries the watch. On arriving at a station he inserts the key, and by turning the same a perforation is produced which gives a record of the time when the watchman has visited the station. The watch, of course, is intended to be locked, so that the watchman cannot get at the paper dial in order to produce fraudulent perforations to cover a neglect of his duty, and the keys, simple as they look, are so shaped that they cannot easily be imitated, for the slightest difference in the height or position of the bit would produce a different action.
'Having thus described my invention,
'I claim as new and desire to secure by letters-patent,——
'1st, The use of a false revolving dial, E, in combination with the stationary index, D, and spring points, d, constructed and operating substantially and for the purpose set forth.
'2d, Producing the perforations on the paper dial, or its equivalent, from the inside out instead of from the outside in, as before.'
The bill was taken as confessed against Keinath. Imhaeuser and Hahn filed an answer denying the infringement and setting up that the indicators manufactured by them were made under letters-patent No. 117,442, granted July 25, 1871, to Anton Meyer, of Stuttgart, Germany, for an improvement in watchman's time checks; and that the complainant's letters are void for want of novelty, the invention therein claimed having been anticipated by a French patent granted to one Nolet in 1847; another granted in the same year to one Schwilgue; English letters No. 957, granted in 1852 to John Rowbotham; English letters No. 1431, granted in 1862 to Thomas Buckney; and in a German work by Emanuel Schreiber, entitled, 'Dr. Friedrich Wilhelm Barfuss's Geschechte der Uhrmacher Kunst von den altester Zeiten bis auf unsere Tage,' published in the year 1856 by Bernh. Friedr. Voeght, in Weimar, Germany.
The drawings and specification of Meyer's letters are as follows:—— 'Specification forming part of Letters-patent No. 117,442, dated July 25, 1871.
'To all whom it may concern:
'Be it known that I, Anton Meyer, of Stuttgart, in the empire of Germany, have invented a new and useful improvement in watchman's time detectors; and I do hereby declare the following to be a full, clear, and exact description thereof, which will enable those skilled in the art to make and use the same, reference being had to the accompanying drawing forming part of this specification, in which drawing——
'Similar letters indicate corresponding parts.
'This invention consists in the arrangement of one or more stationary marking-die in the face-plate of a watch or clock in combination with a cam-shaped bridge extending over the marking-die or dies, and with one or more keys, the bit or bits of which correspond in position to the marking die or dies in such a manner that, by affixing a disk of paper or other suitable material to the movable dialplate of the watch or clock, and causing said disk to revolve between the stationary marking die or dies and the cam-shaped bridge, the key or keys, on being introduced into the watch or clock-case and turned in the proper direction under the cam-shaped bridge, will depress the paper or other material on the marking-die corresponding to the position of its bit, and the exact time when the watchman has visited a certain room or station on his beat will be recorded on the disk of paper or other material.
...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Eversharp, Inc. v. Fisher Pen Co.
...A patented combination cannot be anticipated piecemeal by finding individual features separately in the prior art. Imhaeuser v. Buerk, 101 U.S. 647, 660, 25 L.Ed. 945 (1880); Bates v. Coe, 98 U.S. 31, 48, 25 L.Ed. 68 (1878); Holstensson v. Webcor, Inc., 150 F.Supp. 441 (D.C., Ill., 16. Prio......
-
National Hollow Brake-Beam Co. v. Interchangeable Brake-Beam Co.
... ... infringement of a patent for any other invention ... Schroeder v. Brammer (C.C.) 98 F. 880; Imhaeuser ... v. Buerk, 101 U.S. 647, 653, 25 L.Ed. 945; Griswold ... v. Harker, 62 F. 389, 391, 10 C.C.A. 435, 437, 27 ... U.S.App. 122, 150; Thomson ... ...
-
Warner-Jenkinson Co. v. Allied Chemical Corp.
...method of preparing the disclosed structure. See In re Marshall, 578 F.2d 301, 304 (Cust. & Pat.App. 1978). 59 Cf. Imhaeuser v. Buerk, 101 U.S. 647, 660, 25 L.Ed. 945 (1880) (patented combination cannot be anticipated piecemeal); Duplan Corp. v. Deering Milliken, Inc., 444 F.Supp. 648, 708 ......
-
Kearney & Trecker Corp. v. Cincinnati Milacron, Inc.
...patentee of a secondary invention consisting of a combination of old ingredients which produce new and useful results, Imhaeuser v. Buerk, 101 U.S. 647, 655, 25 L.Ed. 945 although the area of equivalence may vary under the circumstances. Citations omitted The wholesome realism of this doctr......