Dowagiac Mfg. Co. v. Superior Drill Co.

• Decision Date: 08 April 1902
• Docket Number: 1,041.,989
• Citation: 115 F. 886
• Parties: DOWAGIAC MFG. CO. v. SUPERIOR DRILL CO. P. P. MAST & CO. v. SAME.
• Court: U.S. Court of Appeals — Sixth Circuit

115 F. 886

DOWAGIAC MFG. CO. v. SUPERIOR DRILL CO.

P. P. MAST & CO. v. SAME.

Nos. 989, 1,041.

United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit.

April 8, 1902

Appeal from the Circuit Court of the United States for the Western District of Michigan.

The following are the opinions in the courts below:

Superior Drill Co. v. Dowagiac Manufacturing Co. et al.

WANTY District Judge.

Suit is brought on the first claim of patent No. 347,982, issued to W. B. Arnett, on August 24, 1886, which reads as follows 'A spout on conductor for a seeding machine having its lower end flattened laterally and formed with a delivery orifice elongated in the direction of the line of travel whereby the spout is enabled to deliver the seed centrally in a narrow furrow. ' And on the fifth claim of patent No 527,621, issued to F. R. Packman, on October 16, 1894, which reads as follows: 'In a furrow opener, a support having a laterally projecting trunnion and a vertically arranged conduit, a lubricating chamber formed in the top of said support and having a laterally extending passage leading therefrom and ending on the periphery of said trunnion, substantially as specified. ' And on the first, second, third, and sixth claims of patent No. 557,868, issued to F. R. Packman, April 7, 1896, which reads as follows: '(1) A furrow opener consisting essentially of a frame or support having a conduit therein, a disk journaled on a suitable trunnion on said frame or support which is located in front of the conduit, said frame or support being provided with an extended portion which projects below the lower end of the conduit and in front of the same, said extension being formed at the front to conform to the shape of the side of the disk adjacent to which it is adapted to lie, substantially as specified. (2) The combination with the frame having a conduit therein, and a furrow opening disk journaled at an angle on the frame of a guide shield extending below the end of the conduit and in front of the same, said shield being located within the angle of the furrow opening disk so as to stand wholly within the furrow, substantially as specified. (3) The combination with the supporting frame having a conduit therein, and a disk journaled on said frame at an angle to the line of draft, as described, of a downwardly projecting shield in front of and below the conduit, said shield being curved at the front so as to lie adjacent to the disk and being placed wholly within the path of said disk so as to extend within the furrow formed thereby, substantially as specified. * * * (6) The combination with the frame having a supporting trunnion, and an angularly arranged furrow opening disk thereon, a downwardly projecting shield in the rear of and below said trunnion, said shield being located between the said disk and a line extending through the cutting edge thereof parallel to the line of draft, a lug or projection on said frame, and a scraper connected to said lug so as to bear on the inside of said disk, substantially as specified. ' And on the fourth claim of patent No. 578,941, issued to F. R. Packman on March 16, 1897, which reads as follows: '(4) The combination with a furrow opening disk and its support of the drag-bars connected to said support, one of said drag-bars being extended forwardly and laterally, as well as upwardly, at a different vertical as well as lateral angle to the other bar, both of said bars having a common line of attachment, substantially as specified. ' These claims all relate to the construction of what is known as the single disk drill for seeding. Grain drills have been a fruitful subject for patents for a great many years, as shown by the 27 patents introduced in evidence by the defendants to show the prior state of the art; and during later years the disk drill has received considerable attention.

The claim sued upon for the infringement of the Arnett patent No. 347,982, above quoted, is not for a spout in combination with a disk, but for one to be used in a seeding machine, having its lower end flattened laterally and formed with a delivery orifice elongated in the direction of the line of travel, whereby the spout is enabled to deliver the seed centrally in a narrow furrow. An examination of the specifications shows that Arnett claimed this spout applicable, not only to a disk drill, but to other machines as well. Mr. Packman testifies that grain spouts or conduits with flattened or elongated discharge ends, according to his recollection, were used in connection with hoe and shoe drills six or seven years before the date of the Arnett patent; and we find them in the Wagoner patent, No. 60,096, issued November 27, 1868, and in the prior Arnett patent the spout is shown in connection with a disk furrow opener as in the patent sued on. I find this claim to have been anticipated.

The fifth claim of the Packman patent, No. 527,621, refers to the lubricating parts of the device. It had been common for a great many years to provide means for lubricating a journal, and in the prior art relating to grain drills this device is found in the patents issued to La Dow and Bramer, in 1880, and there was no invention in the adoption of it by Packman.

The fourth claim of the Packman patent, No. 578,941, is for the combination with a furrow opening disk and its support of the drag-bars connected to said support, one of said drag-bars being extended forwardly and upwardly in a line behind said disk, and the other drag-bar being extended forwardly and laterally, as well as upwardly, at a different vertical as well as lateral angle to the other bar, both of said bars having a common line of attachment. The use of the double drag-bar extending forwardly to a common line of attachment is shown in the Wagoner patent of 1866, the Shepard patent of 1869, the Arnett patent of 1885, the McClelland patent of 1888, and the Packman patents of 1894 and 1896, and was, therefore, old in 1897, when Packman took out this patent. The Wagoner and McClelland patents show double drag-bars extending forwardly at a different vertical angle to bring their forward ends to a common line of attachment, as claimed by Packman in this fourth claim of his patent of 1897.

The main patent relied upon in this suit is the one, No. 557,868, issued in 1896, and it is claimed that the first, second, third, and sixth claims, above quoted, of this patent, solved the problem in grain drills which made successful what had before proved a failure. It is claimed that this solution consisted in a combination and arrangement of parts whereby all act harmoniously, and for the first time made it possible to plant a predetermined amount of grain regularly and evenly at a specified depth, by scattering the seed centrally in a furrow wholly made by the revolving disk. After a review of the prior state of the art, including the 1894 Packham patent, No. 527,621, every feature which enters into the 1896 patent is found, except the guard, extension, guide, or shield, by which names the device to prevent the land side of the furrow from caving in until the grain has been deposited is called in the claims above quoted. This shield, wherever mentioned in the claims, read in the light of the specifications, lies wholly within the path of the disk and forms no part of the furrow opening device. The complainant's expert testified that all of the parts thus brought together were old, except the extension or shield. There are a number of patents in the record which show the use of shields of various kinds to protect the grain from obstructions falling into the furrow until after the seed has been deposited. It is claimed by the defendants that the adding of this shield, which had formerly been used for the same purpose, did not require the exercise of the inventive faculty. The co-operation accomplished by this protecting device, which is located below and in front of the conduit and wholly within the furrow, and is shaped in front so as to conform to the side of the disk, had never before been accomplished. By this construction the disk opens, and the shield prevents the obstructing of the furrow until the grain is deposited, and it tends to deflect the grain against the revolving disk and scatter it in the furrow. The spout ends where the shield or guard begins; but, with the revolving disk and shield, the grain finds its way to the bottom of the furrow scattered in the center more thoroughly than it could be if it was conducted there by the spout, instead of falling against the disk and shield. Although the spout, disk, and shield in different form are found in the prior art, there was no such combination as is effected by this patent; and, although the elements are old, the beneficial result accomplished by this combination has great utility, which is shown by the general adoption of it by manufacturers of seeding machinery, including the defendant company. The defendant company has adopted this shield for the exact purpose set out in the claims of the patent, makes the same combination, and secures the result which has made this single disk drill a commercial success. I find the first, second, third, and sixth claims of patent No. 557,868 valid and infringed.

There is no proof found in the record supporting the allegation in the bill that defendants C. E. Lyle, W. F. Lyle, and N. F. Choate are joint infringers with the defendant company, and the bill will be dismissed as to them, and a decree entered against the defendants the Dowagiac Manufacturing Company and W. F. Hoyt in the usual form.

Superior Drill Co. v. P. P. Mast & Co. et al.

CLARK District Judge.

In respect to the Arnett patent No. 359,832, issued in 1887, I need only say that according to the weight of the evidence it was never a...