Grier Bros Co. v. Baldwin
Decision Date | 22 January 1915 |
Docket Number | 1891. |
Parties | GRIER BROS. CO. v. BALDWIN et al. |
Court | U.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.
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:
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:
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 the original patent, therefore, the inventor described...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Lowell v. Triplett
...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.
...... 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
...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
...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......