Guarantee Ins Co v. Sellers
Decision Date | 14 November 1887 |
Parties | GUARANTEE INS., T. & S. D. CO., Adm'r, etc., and another v. SELLERS and others. 1 |
Court | U.S. Supreme Court |
This is a suit on a patent granted to the appellants, Charles W. and Frederick Siemens, of Great Britain, on the twelfth day of January, 1869, being a reissue of a patent originally granted to the appellants on the first day of March, 1864. This patent was for an improved regenerator furnace, so called, intended to be used where a high degree of heat is required. By the arrangements of this invention the products of combustion, after passing through the furnace, and before entering the chimney, are utilized in heating what are called the regenerators, consisting of bricks, or other refractory materials, loosely piled up in two pairs of separate chambers though which, alternately, after being thus heated, the air and gases are made to pass on their way to the furnace, and thus become raised to an intense degree of heat before entering it. While one pair of regenerators is being thus heated by the outgoing products of combustion or flame, the other pair are giving out their heat to the air and gases which are passing into the furnace; and then, by a reversal of dampers, the current is changed, and the air and gases are made to pass through the newly-heated regenerators, and the products of combustion or flame through those that have become partially cooled; and so on alternately. The apparatus has various incidental appliances necessary to its successful operation. Thus, as the regenerator chambers are placed underneath the furnace, spaces are formed between them and the furnace bottom, for the purpose of admitting a circulation of air to cool the parts, and prevent their being destroyed by the intense heat. Another arrangement is that of a separate and distinct furnace, of peculiar form, for the consumption of the raw fuel, so constructed and operated that the gases produced thereby are carried over by a suitable flue to one of the heated regenerators, while atmospheric air is admitted into the other regenerator of the same pair. The air and gases are thus kept separate until about to enter the furnace by separate flues, when they meet and commingle and produce a rapid combustion and a most intense heat. This is the general nature the invention, and this explanation will be sufficient for understanding the claims of the patent, which are four in number, and are as follows, to-wit:
The defendants do not deny that the appellants were the authors of the very ingenious invention claimed by the patent; and they do not seriously deny that they use it. The principal defense which they set up is that the appellants took out an English patent for the same invention, dated January 22, 1861, and sealed July 19, 1861; and that, by force of the acts of 1839 and 1861, the American patent expired at the end of 17 years from the sealing of the English patent, namely, on the nineteenth day of July, 1878; and they deny that they used the said invention before the last-mentioned date, and no evidence is given that they did so.
Chas. S. Whitman, for appellants.
[Argument of Counsel from pages 279-282 intentionally omitted] S. S. Hollingsworth and Jos. C. Fraley, for appellees.
The questions to be decided, therefore, are whether the English patent (which was given in evidence) was for the same invention as the American patent; and, if so, whether the latter is limited to expire at the end of 17 years from the sealing of the former. We think that both of these questions must be answered in the affirmative.
As to the first question, we have carefully compared the two patents, the...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Towson v. Denson
...are to be liberally construed. 26 Am. & Eng. Enc. Law, 676; 30 Ark. 608; 101 U.S. 597; 26 N.J.Eq. 79; 30 Am. St. 254; 51 Am. St. 174; 123 U.S. 276; 140 U.S. 453; 148 490; 65 Ark. 148. Restricting or qualifying clauses must be strictly construed, so as not to interfere with the scope of the ......
-
Electrical Accumulator Co. v. Julien Electric Co.
... ... Smith v. Goodyear, 93 U.S. 486, 498; Bliss v ... Merrill, 33 F. 39, 40; Siemens v. Sellers, 123 ... U.S. 276, 283, 8 S.Ct. 117. But the evidence of Prof. Asahel ... K. Eaton, if it does not amount to a complete anticipation, ... so ... ...
-
Clinicomp Int'l, Inc. v. Cerner Corp.
...of proceedings on the first application, of 35 U.S.C § 120 have been met. 4. Defendant also cites to Guarantee Ins. Trust & Safe-Deposit Co. v. Seller, 123 U.S. 276, 283 (1887) arguing the Court rejected a claim-by-claim term analysis. Id. The Court stated, "[a] patent cannot be exempted fr......
-
Commercial Acetylene Co. v. Searchlight Gas Co.
... ... It is, ... however, not essential that the identity of the ... subject-matter be established literally. In Siemen v ... Sellers, 123 U.S. 276, 8 Sup.Ct. 117, 31 L.Ed. 153, the ... court says: ... 'As ... to the first question' (i.e. whether the English patent ... ...