Cameron Septic Tank Co. v. Village of Saratoga Springs

Decision Date07 January 1908
Docket Number81.
Citation159 F. 453
PartiesCAMERON SEPTIC TANK CO. v. VILLAGE OF SARATOGA SPRINGS et al.
CourtU.S. Court of Appeals — Second Circuit

On Rehearing, February 7, 1908.

Appeal from the Circuit Court of the United for the Northern District of New York.

Gifford & Bull (Livingston Gifford, of counsel), for appellant.

J. J Healey, Jr. (C. L. Sturtevant and Ephraim Banning, of counsel), for appellees.

Before LACOMBE, COXE, and WARD, Circuit Judges.

LACOMBE Circuit Judge.

The opinion below has quoted at great length from the specifications. Since it may fairly be assumed that no one is likely to read this opinion without also examining that of the Circuit Court, those voluminous excerpts need not be repeated here, although in the progress of this discussion it may be necessary to quote many passages from such specifications. There are two groups of claims-- those for a process, and those for an apparatus. The subject of discussion may be best introduced by reciting the five process claims which are relied upon as follows '(1) The process of purifying sewage, which consists in subjecting the sewage under exclusion of air, of light and of agitation to the action of anaerobic bacteria until the whole mass of solid organic matter contained therein becomes liquefied, and then subjecting the liquid effluent to air and light.

'(2) .the process of liquefying the solid matter contained in sewage, which consists in secluding a pool of sewage having a nondisturbing inflow and outflow, from light, air, and agitation until a mass or micro-organisms has been developed of a character and quantity sufficient to liquefy the solid matter of the flowing sewage, the inflow serving to sustain the micro-organisms, and then subjecting said pool under exclusion of light and air and under a nondisturbing inflow and outflow to the liquefying action of the so-cultivated micro-organisms until the solid organic matter contained in the flowing sewage is dissolved.

'(3) The process of liquefying the solid matter contained in sewage, which consists in secluding a pool of sewage having a nondisturbing inflow and outflow, from light, air and agitation until a mass of micro-organisms has been developed of a character and quantity sufficient to liquefy the solid matter of the flowing sewage, the inflow serving to sustain the micro-organisms, then subjecting said pool under a nondisturbing inflow and outflow and under exclusion of light and air to the liquefying action of the so-cultivated micro-organisms until the solid organic matter contained in the flowing sewage is dissolved, and then subjecting the liquid overflow to an aerating operation.

'(4) The process of liquefying the solid matter contained in sewage, which consists in secluding a pool of sewage having a nondisturbing inflow and outflow from light, air and agitation until a mass of micro-organisms has been developed of a character and quantity sufficient to liquefy the solid matter of the flowing sewage, the inflow serving to sustain the micro-organisms, then subjecting said pool under a nondisturbing inflow and outflow and under exclusion of light and air to the liquefying action of the so-cultivated micro-organisms until the solid organic matter contained in the flowing sewage is dissolved, then subjecting the liquid outflow to an aerating operation, and then to a filtering operation.'

'(21) The process of liquefying the solid matter contained in sewage, which consists in secluding a pool of sewage having a nondisturbing inflow and outflow from light, air and agitation until a thick scum is formed on the surface thereof and a mass of micro-organisms has been developed of a character and quantity sufficient to liquefy the solid matter of the flowing sewage, the inflow serving to sustain the micro-organisms, and then subjecting said pool under the cover of said scum and under a nondisturbing inflow and outflow to the liquefying action of the so-cultivated micro-organisms until all the solid matter contained in the flowing sewage is dissolved.'

The apparatus for carrying on this process consists of a tank constructed of any suitable material, such as cement-concrete, shallow in comparison with its other dimensions, and in which the 'pool of sewage' is located. It may be provided with an air-tight cover, for temporary use only, because after the tank has been in operation for two or three days a peculiar brown scum begins to form at the top and eventually becomes two or three inches thick and serves as an air-tight cover for the sewage. The pool which is secluded in the tank is secured against disturbance from inflow or outflow by having inlet and outlet so located and constructed that the sewage will flow through in a quiet manner. From the tank the effluent passes into an aerator, where it is exposed to the action of the air and afterwards passes on to an ordinary filter bed. By reference to the claims it will be perceived that the second and twenty/first cover only so much of the process as takes place in the secluded pool, the first and third cover also the aerating operation, and the fourth adds the final filtering operation.

To a proper understanding of what the patent shows, it will be necessary to postulate certain definitions. Anaerobes are bacteria (microorganisms) that are killed by air; they can neither act, multiply, nor even exist in contact with free oxygen. They are also called the germs of putrefaction. Aerobes are bacteria that die without air or oxygen. They are also called the germs of oxidation or of nitrification, and their action is often called decomposition or fermentation. That both these families of bacteria are potent in breaking up the solid parts of sewage matter was a fact long known to those skilled in the art. The patentee introduced a new word to the art-- 'septic'; he calls his tank a septic tank. Defendant's expert concedes that the term was first used by Cameron, and applied to the tank which he constructed and put in operation at Exeter, England. However this word may have been used subsequently by others, it should, in construing this patent, be given the meaning which the patentee gave to it. Examination of the specification and claims shows that the definition contained in complainant's brief is in accord with them. Septic action is the action of a colony of anaerobes preventing the accumulation of solids, unhampered by the presence of aerobes or oxygen or agitation. The septic tank is the home and workshop of such anaerobic colony, and its structural characteristic, as distinguished from other tanks, includes the roof of septic scum which is build by the anaerobes over the sewage current and remains as a permanent part of the tank.

The essential features of Cameron's process are these: He secures separate and successive action of anaerobes and aerobes on the organic matter of the solids in the flowing current of sewage. He first sets the anaerobes to work under such conditions that whatever aerobes were present in the flowing current as it enters the anaerobes' workshop are quickly destroyed, because without air or oxygen they cannot live, and at the outflow end of his septic tank there is absolutely none; tests mark free oxygen as zero. He cultivates this colony of anaerobes under conditions most favorable for their growth and activity, eliminating light air, and agitation while the slowly moving current is exposed to their activities. There is some oxygen present when the sewage flows in, although it has all disappeared before it flows out; and the current is not completely at rest, it flows in a quiet manner-- were it stagnant, the desired bacterial action would be disturbed and retarded. But there is a substantial absence from the current of oxygen and agitation. A curious result of setting the anaerobes to work under such conditions, after the septic scum has formed, is pointed out in the specifications. 'The micro-organisms increase at a fabulous rate, being fed by the incoming solid matter of the sewage until a mass of bacteria is developed sufficient to liquefy substantially all the solid organic matter contained in the sewage passing through the pool: * * * and the outflow is in the form of a liquid without solid particles of sewage * * * The liquefied sewage as it leaves the septic pool has a slight odor, * * * and to relieve it of this slight odor it is subjected to an aerating operation. ' It is contended by the complainant that such effluent is peculiarly adapted for further treatment on a filter bed.

Thus treated, the colony of bacteria is continually recruited from incoming solid matter, maintaining such numbers as are sufficient at all times quickly to transform the sewage solids and the wastes of bacterial energy into a liquid effluent. This action is thus described by one of defendant's experts:

'In my opinion from six to eight weeks is required in which the liquefying action will be established to the extent of creating an equilibrium beyond which the solids will not accumulate on the bottom of the tank or on the top thereof; * * * an equilibrium between the accumulated solids in the tank plus those being constantly added thereto by the inflow of the sewage, and the bacterial activities whereby further accumulations are prevented.'

Moreover as the patentee states, 'by this invention crude sewage can be treated for long periods without practically any sludge at all forming in the tank. ' In the plant at Saratoga, which treats sewage by the process above described-- infringement of these process claims is not denied in defendant's brief-- 'the tanks have never been emptied since they were put in service July, 1903, a period of 2 1/2 years, and no solid matter has been taken from them. ' In consequence this...

To continue reading

Request your trial
7 cases
  • Application of Bergy
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Customs and Patent Appeals (CCPA)
    • March 29, 1979
    ...780, 24 L.Ed. 139; Risdon Iron & Locomotive Works v. Medart, 158 U.S. 68, 15 S.Ct. 745, 39 L.Ed. 899; Cameron Septic Tank Co. v. Village of Saratoga Springs, 159 F. 453 (C.C.A. 2); Dick v. Lederle Antitoxin Laboratories (D.C.) 43 F.2d 628. 6 USPQ 40 The statement the examiner relied on, "We......
  • Application of Bergy
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Customs and Patent Appeals (CCPA)
    • November 23, 1977
    ...780, 24 L.Ed. 139; Risdon Iron & Locomotive Works v. Medart, 158 U.S. 68, 15 S.Ct. 745, 39 L.Ed. 899; Cameron Septic Tank Co. v. Village of Saratoga Springs, 159 F. 453 (C.C.A. 2); Dick v. Lederle Antitoxin Laboratories (D.C.) 43 F.2d 628. 6 USPQ 40 The statement the examiner relied on, "We......
  • WISCONSIN ALUMNI RF v. Vitamin Technologists
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Southern District of California
    • October 1, 1941
    ...into a certain specified condition and then uses it in that condition for a practical purpose." Cameron Septic Tank Co. v. Village of Saratoga Springs et al., 2 Cir., 159 F. 453, 463; Telephone Cases, 126 U.S. 1, 8 S.Ct. 778, 31 L.Ed. 863; American Chemical Paint Co. v. C. R. Wilson Body Co......
  • Knaust Bros. v. Goldschlag
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Southern District of New York
    • August 17, 1939
    ...to the removal of the boxes to the second zone, as was true in the use of the second septic tank in Cameron Septic Tank Company v. Village of Saratoga Springs, et al., 2 Cir., 159 F. 453. That I cannot do I think that, so far as the patent is concerned, the old instrumentalities are doing t......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT