Endevco Corporation v. Chicago Dynamic Industries, Inc.
| Decision Date | 21 February 1967 |
| Docket Number | Civ. A. No. 63 C 2185. |
| Citation | 268 F. Supp. 640 |
| Parties | ENDEVCO CORPORATION, a corporation, Plaintiff, v. CHICAGO DYNAMIC INDUSTRIES, INC., a corporation, Defendant. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — Northern District of Illinois |
COPYRIGHT MATERIAL OMITTED
James R. Dowdall, Pendleton, Neuman, Seibold & Williams, Chicago, Ill., and Reed C. Lawlor, Los Angeles, Cal., for plaintiff Endevco.
Edward C. Threedy, Threedy & Threedy, Chicago, Ill., for defendant Chicago Dynamic.
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. This action arises under the Patent Laws of the United States, 35 U.S.C., and this Court has jurisdiction pursuant to Title 28, §§ 1338(a) and 1400(b).
2. Endevco Corporation, a California corporation who brought this suit, assigned all of its right, title and interest in and to the Wright patent 3,089,923, together with the right of recovery for past as well as present infringement of said patent, to B-D Equipment Corp., a California corporation. Subsequently and before trial, B-D Equipment Corporation changed its name to Endevco Corporation, the present plaintiff herein.
3. Defendant, Chicago Dynamic Industries, Inc., is a corporation of the State of Illinois, with its principal place of business in the City of Chicago, and County of Cook, within the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division.
4. The patent in suit, No. 3,089,923, relates to a Sectional Digital Switch and was issued May 14, 1963 on an application filed on June 15, 1959 by Harry Dudley Wright.
5. The patent in suit contains eleven claims, of which only claims 1 to 6 inclusive are here in issue. Claim 1 is a parent claim, and claims 2 to 6 are dependent claims, each incorporating claim 1 and adding thereto structural and functional limitations. While the patent bears the title "Sectional Digital Switch" such as covered by claims 7 to 11 inclusive not here in issue, claims 1 to 6 in issue are directed to a "switch" per se.
6. The claims in issue read as follows:
Claim 1. A switch comprising an outer wall member 15 of contoured configuration forming a limited switch actuation region 25 disposed between and bounded by a pair of spaced, sloping and diverging outside surfaces 15a, said pair of diverging surfaces extending outwardly from said switch actuation region and being located adjacent opposite ends of said region, said switch actuation region having an open window 25 including a portion extending substantially from one to the other of said sloping surfaces, a rotor 30 mounted for rotation in either of two opposite directions on an axis located anterior of said wall member and said open window portion, switching means 60 coupled to said rotor for completing a plurality of different electrical circuits in response respectively to movement of said rotor to a plurality of predetermined different angular circuit registration positions, said rotor 30 comprising a movable operator portion having a plurality of spaced radial members 35 at least one of which always extends through said open window portion and each of which is adapted to be manually engaged only in said limited switch actuation region of said outer wall member, said radial members 35 comprising lugs extending outwardly of said operator portion in sufficiently spaced relation to one another to permit insertion of a finger tip into the space at either side of each said lug between directly adjacent ones of said lugs to permit a turning force to be exerted upon said rotor in either of two opposite directions by finger pressure exerted in a direction predominantly circumferential and predominantly non-radial of said rotor, one of said radial members 35 comprising a lug disposed adjacent a central part of said window portion 25 at a given time and others of said radial members comprising further lugs inclined to lie generally along both of said pair of sloping surfaces at said given time, said sloping surfaces 15a being respectively positioned to intercept a finger, engaging one or the opposite side respectively of said one radial member, after said finger and said one radial member have moved said rotor in one or the opposite direction to bring said rotor 30 into one of said predetermined different circuit registration positions, thereby to cause switching to be effected in a succession of limited arcuate rotor rotations determined primarily by the positioning of said sloping surfaces 15a relative to the finger engaged one of said radial members 35.
Claim 2. The switch of claim 1 wherein said rotor 30 further includes an indicia bearing section 36 rotatable with said rotor, said window 25 including a further portion 28 disposed adjacent said indicia bearing section and positioned to permit the viewing of one indicium only on said indicia bearing section at any given time.
Claim 3. The switch of claim 2 wherein said further window portion 28 is disposed adjacent to and at one side of said first mentioned window portion 25, said further portion being shorter in length than said first portion, the adjacent sides of said window portions merging with and opening into one another whereby said window is substantially T-shaped in configuration.
Claim 4. The switch of claim 1 wherein said switching means 60, Fig. 5; 80, Fig. 8 includes a printed circuit 64, Fig. 3; 84 etc. Fig. 6 disposed at a position anterior of said wall member, and wiper means 60; Fig. 5; 80, Fig. 8 engaging said printed circuit, said wiper means and said printed circuit being relatively rotatable for effecting a switching operation upon rotation of said rotor.
Claim 5. The switch of claim 4 wherein said printed circuit 64, Fig. 3; 84 etc. Fig. 6 is carried by a supporting member 20, Fig. 3 fixed in position relative to said wall member, said printed circuit including arcuate conductive segments 64, Fig. 3, 84 etc. Fig. 6 disposed at different radial positions relative to said rotor axis of rotation, said wiper means 60, Fig. 5, 80 Fig. 8 comprising a plurality of conductive fingers 72-75, Fig. 5; 102-106, Fig. 8 carried by said rotor member at such different radial positions, said rotor being continuously rotatable through angles greater than 360° in each of said opposite directions.
Claim 6. The switch of claim 1 including resilient detent means 45 engaging a portion of said rotor for resiliently holding said rotor in its said different registration positions.
7. On the issue of validity the defendant relies upon the following prior art patents:
U. S
Patent No. Date Patentee
745,081 Nov. 24, 1903 Smith
1,555,969 Oct. 6, 1925 Hatch
1,564,551 Dec. 8, 1925 Gates
2,414,191 Jan. 14, 1947 Coon
2,421,881 June 10, 1947 Heasty
2,815,586 Dec. 10, 1957 MacCheyne
2,853,564 Sept. 23, 1958 Gahagan
D-188,724 Aug. 30, 1960 Powell
as well as plaintiff's prior art switch Model 7110.
8. The issues are as to the validity and infringement of claims 1 to 6 in issue.
The Switch of the Patent in Suit
9. The switch of claim 1 in issue comprises an outer wall member forming a limited switch actuation region disposed between and bounded by a pair of spaced sloping and diverging outside wall surfaces extending outwardly from the region and located adjacent opposite ends thereof. Located in the region is an open window including a window portion which extends substantially from one to the other of the sloping wall surfaces. The rotor (thumbwheel) is mounted for rotation in either of two opposite directions on an axis anterior of the wall member and the open window portion and beyond 360.° Coupled to the rotor is a switching means for completing a plurality of different electrical circuits. The thumbwheel comprises an operator portion having a plurality of radial members (finger lugs) at least one of which always extends through the open window portion. The finger lugs are sufficiently spaced with respect to each other to permit insertion of a finger tip into the space at either side of each finger lug to permit turning force to be exerted upon the thumbwheel in either of two opposite directions by finger pressure exerted in a direction predominantly circumferential and predominantly nonradial of said rotor. The finger lugs are inclined to lie generally along both of the pair of sloping wall surfaces at a given time. The sloping surfaces are positioned to intercept a finger engaging one of said finger lugs after the finger lug has moved the thumbwheel in one or the opposite direction into circuit registration position, thereby to cause switching to be effected in a succession of limited arcuate rotor rotations determined primarily by the position of the sloping surfaces relative to the finger engaged one of said finger lugs.
10. Claim 2 in issue adds to the switch of claim 1 an indicia bearing portion positioned to permit the viewing of the indicia thereon through the window.
11. Claim 3 in issue adds to the switch of claim 2 the limitation that the window is substantially T-shaped.
12. Claim 4 in issue adds to the switch of claim 1 the limitation that the switching means includes a printed circuit and a wiper means engaging the printed circuit.
13. Claim 5 in issue adds to the switch of claim 4 the limitation that the printed circuit is carried by a supporting member and includes arcuate conductive segments disposed at different radial positions relative to the thumbwheel axis of rotation and that the wiper means comprises a plurality of conductive fingers and describes the rotor (thumbwheel) as being continuously rotatable through angles greater than 360°.
14. Claim 6 in issue adds to the structure of the switch of claim 1 a spring detent for resiliently holding the thumbwheel in its different circuit registration...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Leach v. Rockwood & Company
...United States Supreme Court is to widen the scope of the prior art which can be considered pertinent." Endevco Corp. v. Chicago Dynamic Indus., Inc., 268 F.Supp. 640 (N.D.Ill.1967). This court concludes that patents dealing with silo loaders would be a natural source of information for one ......
-
Default Proof Credit Card System v. Home Depot
...point out and distinctly claim" the purported invention, and Claim 1 is indefinite. See, e.g., Endevco Corp. v. Chicago Dynamic Indus., Inc., 268 F.Supp. 640, 654 (N.D.Ill.1967) (one indefinite clause in a claim renders the claim as a whole indefinite). This does not mean, however, that the......
-
I. U. Technology Corp. v. Research-Cottrell, Inc., RESEARCH-COTTREL
...(S.D.Ohio 1979); Metal Coating Corp. v. Baker Manufacturing Co., 277 F.Supp. 403 (W.D.Wis.1967); Endevco Corporation v. Chicago Dynamic Industries, Inc., 268 F.Supp. 640 (N.D.Ill.1967); Canadian Ingersoll-Rand Co. v. Peterson Prod. of San Mateo, 223 F.Supp. 803 (N.D.Cal.1963), aff'd in pert......
-
Shelco, Inc. v. Dow Chemical Company
...success. Jungersen v. Ostby & Barton Co., 335 U.S. 560, 567, 69 S.Ct. 269, 93 L.Ed. 235 (1949) Endevco Corp. v. Chicago Dynamic Industries, Inc., 268 F.Supp. 640 (N.D. Ill., 1967) T. P. Laboratories, Inc. v. Huge, 371 F.2d 231 (7th Cir., 1966) Schreyer v. Chicago Motorcoil Corp., 118 F.2d 8......