Grier Bros Co. v. Baldwin

Decision Date22 January 1915
Docket Number1891.
PartiesGRIER BROS. CO. v. BALDWIN et al.
CourtU.S. Court of Appeals — Third Circuit

Joseph M. Nesbit and Thomas S. Brown, both of Pittsburgh, Pa., for appellant.

James Q. Rice, of New York City, for appellees.

Before BUFFINGTON, McPHERSON, and WOOLLEY, Circuit Judges.

J. B McPHERSON, Circuit Judge.

The bill in this suit charges (1) infringement of reissued letters patent No. 13,542, and (2) unfair competition in the sale of the lamp covered thereby. It came first before the late Judge Young, who refused a preliminary injunction to restrain infringement, but granted it to restrain unfair competition. (D.C.) 210 F. 560. Upon final hearing before Judge Orr, a final injunction was. granted upon both grounds. (D.C.) 215 F. 735.

1. In order to understand the first branch of the controversy, the scope of the original letters patent must be determined. They are numbered 821,580 and were issued May 22, 1906, to Frederick E. Baldwin for improvements in acetylene gas lamps 'intended for use and adapted to use as bicycle automobile, yacht, or miner's lamp, or for any other analogous purpose. * * * ' The body of the lamp is a metallic or other container, and this is divided (horizontally by preference) into two chambers or compartments, the upper intended for water, and the lower for calcium carbid. The gas is generated in the lower chamber. The specification deals with two problems, but we are concerned with only one of them, namely, 'The means for effecting and controlling the generation of gas. ' That problem arises out of the following situation: Finely divided carbid is placed in the gas-generating chamber and retained in position by a suitably adjusted spring or other suitable device. A tube leads from the water-chamber into the chamber below, and by this duct the water and the carbid are brought together. The gas is generated by the chemical reaction of these two substances, and the gradual feed of the water must be carefully maintained. The inventor goes on:

'Various means have been employed to regulate or control the normal rate of flow of water through a water-supply tube. For example, the bore of the tube has been made of small diameter; but this plan has not been found practical for various reasons. In the first place, the discharge outlet thereof is under pressure of several inches of water, and it is practically impossible to make the bore so minute that the water will issue in sufficiently small quantity. If the attempt is made to secure this small flow by making the tube very minute, it then becomes so easily clogged that the operation of the lamp is rendered extremely uncertain. The smallest particle of foreign matter in the water, or a bit of slaked carbid carried into the bore by back pressure of the gas, will stop the flow completely, and the lamp will go out. Such a tube is also difficult, in fact almost impossible, to clean. Another method which has been employed is to use a duct of comparatively large bore, and fill the same with a wick of more or less loose texture for the purpose of checking the supply. This for a time operates with some degree of success, though from the very nature of the material used the precise amount of the feed can never be exactly determined. A valve is generally necessary to regulate the supply. Furthermore, when the lamp has been used for a time, the wick, which, of course, must act as a strainer, becomes filled with solid matter-- such as sand, dirt, and organic particles contained in the water-- so that the feed is reduced. This necessitates frequent adjustment of the valve to restore the proper supply. In time the wick becomes completely choked, and the user, often unskillful in such matters, must tamper with the lamp and insert a new wick, which is at best a troublesome procedure. Again, if the lamp has not been used for some time, the wick dries out, and a very appreciable time is required to soak it up so that the water will again flow through.'

These being the difficulties, the patentee turned to his means for overcoming them. His plan was to make the bore of the duct comparatively large, and then to obstruct or restrict it by placing a wire or rod therein, preferably in the center, thus leaving a channel of the proper size and shape. The advantages are thus described:

'This arrangement is simple; but in a long experience it has been found to be entirely successful. It is possible to secure the correct drop-by-drop feed with a duct of considerable size, since the friction of the water on the large area of the tube-wall and wire reduces its flow. This retarding-friction may be regulated by varying the size of wire used. The duct does not become choked, since, if foreign particles are deposited therein, the water can take a zigzag course around (them) without the supply being appreciably affected. If it is at any time necessary to clean the tube, the wire is simply reciprocated and rotated a few times from the outside of the lamp without disturbing the position of other parts. This nice regulation of the flow enables me to entirely dispense with the troublesome adjustment of the valve. If a valve is used at all, it is employed to shut off the flow entirely and not to regulate it. The construction just described is shown,' etc., etc.

As will be observed, the device thus described is intended to perform a certain part in effecting and controlling the generation of the gas; this part being the regulation of the water-supply, or the control of the flow. But the generation of the gas might also be effected and controlled in another way, and to this subject the inventor immediately passed on:

'In some cases, however, there is employed in connection with the means for introducing the water into the mass of carbid (that is, in connection with the duct and rod) a device in the nature of a stirrer, which, on proper manipulation, may be used to break up the mass of carbid surrounding the outlet of the water duct, and which, by having become slaked and caked by the action of water, prevents the proper percolation of the latter to the unslaked carbid in the receptacle G, Fig. 2. As such device I employ a stem or rod N, which extends down through the tube L and is bent at substantially right angles to form an arm N'. This rod may form a prolongation of the valve-stem M', of Fig. 2, or, in case no valve is used, may extend from the top of the lamp down through the water-reservoir, as shown in Fig. 3.
'As calcium carbid possesses strongly absorptive properties, the introduction of water through the tube L will result in the gradual slaking of the material about its outlet; but the lime thus produced becomes gradually less permeable to the water, so that an insufficient quantity of gas is generated to maintain the proper flame. When this becomes noticeable, the rod N is turned, so as to cause the arm N' to break up to a greater or less extent the mass of lime, and in practice I have found that under ordinary conditions this is amply sufficient to insure a substantially uniform generation of gas until all the carbid in the receptacle G is exhausted.
'In the larger-sized lamps it is desirable to employ two or more water-tubes L and, if desired, stirring-rods N, extending down to different points in the carbid-receptacle. This is indicated in Fig. 4, which is an under plan view of the bottom D of the water-reservoir, showing three water-tubes L in section. It is, however, desirable, when a plurality of stirring rods are employed, that some means be provided for actuating all of them simultaneously. A device suitable for this purpose is shown in Fig. 6, in which O is a ring placed on top of the lamp, with which bent ends of all the rods N engage, so that a partial rotation of the ring will impart a corresponding movement to each rod.'

In the original patent, therefore, the inventor described...

To continue reading

Request your trial
6 cases
  • Lowell v. Triplett
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (4th Circuit)
    • June 3, 1935
    ...199 F. 133. The patent was then reissued and the reissue held void by the Circuit Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. Grier Bros. Co. v. Baldwin, 219 F. 735. The Circuit Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit then held the reissue patent to be valid. Baldwin v. Abercrombie & Fitch Co.,......
  • Eisenstadt Mfg. Co. v. J.M. Fisher Co.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of Rhode Island
    • May 18, 1916
    ...... 1, 1915, H. B. Pratt and Bullard Bros. Company had been. continuously manufacturing the said links and selling them in. various ...939, 90 C.C.A. 299, 19 L.R.A. (N.S.) 269;. Rushmore v. Saxon (C.C.) 158 F. 499; Baldwin v. Grier Bros. Co. (D.C.) 215 F. 735; Grier Bros. Co. v. Baldwin, 219 F. 735, 135 C.C.A. 433; ......
  • Grier Bros Co. v. Baldwin
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (3rd Circuit)
    • April 16, 1920
    ...infringed, and that the defendant was also guilty of unfair competition. On appeal, this court, pursuant to an opinion reported at 219 F. 735, 135 C.C.A. 433, affirmed lower court's decree on the cause of action of unfair competition, but reversed it on the patent cause of action. Pursuant ......
  • Sinko v. Snow-Craggs Corporation
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (7th Circuit)
    • July 7, 1939
    ...cases, namely, Enterprise Mfg. Co. v. Landers, 2 Cir., 131 F. 240; Yale and Towne Mfg. Co. v. Alder, 2 Cir., 154 F. 37; Grier Bros. v. Baldwin, 3 Cir., 219 F. 735; and Bayley & Sons v. Braunstein, D.C., 246 F. 314. We have considered these cases and we find that the law stated therein is no......
  • 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