Los Alamitos Sugar Co. v. Carroll
Decision Date | 04 October 1909 |
Docket Number | 1,701. |
Citation | 173 F. 280 |
Parties | LOS ALAMITOS SUGAR CO. et al. v. CARROLL. [d] |
Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Ninth Circuit |
Miller & White and Lawler, Allen, Van Dyke & Jutten, for appellants.
Frederick S. Lyon, for appellee.
Before GILBERT and ROSS, Circuit Judges, and HUNT, District Judge.
This suit was brought by the appellee in the court below for the alleged infringement of certain letters patent issued to him the first of which was for a load-dumping apparatus, numbered 561,485, and dated June 2, 1896, and the second of which was for alleged improvements therein, numbered 595,236, and dated December 7, 1897.
The complainant, who is the appellee here, alleged infringement of claims 1 and 2 of the first patent, and of claims 1, 6 and 7 of the second. The defendants denied any infringement and also set up in defense anticipation and lack of invention, laches, and also that the second patent was void on the ground that it does not disclose an operative apparatus.
In this court the appellants moved, and the appellee consented to the dismissal of the cause as to the appellant Clark, and an order to that effect was entered.
In the specification of the first patent Carroll said:
The applicant then set out drawings illustrating the alleged invention, with specific descriptions thereof, and made five claims, the first and second of which are as follows: '(1) The combination of a vehicle support arranged to tilt sidewise; means for tilting the support and returning it to a level position; a stop arranged to stop the support on a slant; a vehicle having a bed provided with a drop side wholly above the wheels and adapted to allow its load to be dumped off sidewise; means extending between and fastened to the tilting support and the vehicle bed for holding the vehicle on the vehicle support when it is tilted; a latch for holding the drop side in place and adapted to be released when the wagon is tilted; and means for supporting the drop side when it is dropped.
'(2) The combination of a vehicle support arranged to tilt sidewise; means for tilting the support and returning it to a level position; a stop arranged to stop the support on a slant; a vehicle having its bed adapted to allow its load to be dumped off sidewise; means extending between and fastened to the tilting support and the vehicle bed for holding the vehicle on the vehicle support when it is tilted; and a team holding support arranged at the front end of the tilting vehicle support and independent thereof, and adapted to allow the team to stand thereon hitched to the vehicle while the vehicle is being dumped.'
It is manifest, we think, that these claims are limited to the dumping of wagons; and it is so conceded by the counsel for the appellee. The great usefulness of the appellee's apparatus cannot be doubted, for the importance and magnitude of the sugar-beet industry is not only a matter of common knowledge, but is also shown by the evidence, which further shows that prior to it the beets were unloaded from wagons either by means of forks and shovels, or by nets first placed in the wagons upon which the beets were loaded, and...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Carson v. American Smelting & Refining Co.
......Cohn, 207 F. 547, 125. C.C.A. 197; Klein v. Russell, 19 Wall. 466, 22 L.Ed. 116; Los Alamitos v. Carroll, 173 F. 280, 97 C.C.A. 446; Lalance v. Habermann (C.C.) 53 F. 378;. Manhattan v. ......
-
Payne Furnace & Supply Co. v. Williams-Wallace Co.
...purpose of the ventilation is to cool the flue pipe. A different principle is involved in Stadtfeld's teaching. Los Alamitos Sugar Company v. Carroll, 9 Cir., 173 F. 280, 284. It seems to be conceded that the so-called Los Angeles installations were banned some years ago by The Savage paten......
-
Blanchard v. JL Pinkerton, Inc.
...purpose of the present patent, which is automatic safety. Nor do they operate on the same principles. See Los Alamitos Sugar Co. v. Carroll, 9 Cir., 1909, 173 F. 280, 284. Thus taking the measure of the invention from the claims as described, but not enlarged, in the specifications and depi......
-
Stebler v. Riverside Heights Orange Growers' Ass'n
...... found in any one of them. As we had occasion to say in. Los Alamitos Sugar Co. v. Carroll, 173 F. 280, 97. C.C.A. 446:. . . . 'It. is not sufficient, to ......