Klein v. City of Seattle

Decision Date06 October 1896
Docket Number287.
Citation77 F. 200
PartiesKLEIN v. CITY OF SEATTLE.
CourtU.S. Court of Appeals — Ninth Circuit

Gavin McNab, Byers & Byers, and Battle & Shipley, for plaintiff in error.

Frank A. Steele and John K. Brown, for defendant in error.

Before GILBERT and ROSS, Circuit Judges, and HAWLEY, District Judge.

HAWLEY District Judge.

This is an action brought by the plaintiff in error against the defendant in error to recover damages for infringement of letters patent No. 297,699, issued to the plaintiff on the 20th of April, 1884, for an improvement in pins for holding insulators supporting electric wires. The case was tried before the court, without a jury, in accordance with a stipulation in conformity with the provisions of section 649 of the Revised Statutes. It is presented to this court upon special findings of fact found by the circuit court. 63 F 702. The court held the patent to be void for want for novelty and invention, and entered judgment in favor of defendant for its costs. Is this judgment sustained by the findings of fact? This is the only question presented for review. Trust Co. v. Wood, 8 C.C.A. 658, 60 F. 346 348, and authorities there cited; Blanchard v. Bank, 21 C.C.A. 319, 75 F. 249; Grayson v. Lynch, 163 U.S 468, 472, 16 Sup.Ct. 1064.

The specifications of the patent are as follows:

'My invention relates to an improved pin or support for fixing and holding in place the glass insulators upon cross-arms of telegraph poles, and in other situations where an insulator support or attachment is required for an electric wire. As hereinafter more fully described, my improvement consists in providing an insulator pin of metal, having a head of larger diameter than the body of the pin, on which is a screw thread, or portion of a thread, of proper size, to be inserted into, and to engage with, the screw socket in the insulator.

(Image Omitted)

'Referring to the accompany drawings: * * * Figure 2 is a view of the pin or support in detail, with the cap or insulator glass in section. Figure 3 is a view of the pin. A represents a glass insulator of the kind generally employed on telegraph poles and other situations to afford points of support for electric wires, in which is a socket with a spiral thread or groove for fastening it upon its pin. To provide a strong and permanent supporting pin, I take a length of metal rod, preferably of wrought iron, and upon one end I form a head, b, of greater diameter than the body of the rod, and of a size to be received into the socket or opening in the glass, A. This head, b, is provided with a spiral thread or groove, e, to engage with the thread in the socket of the glass, and this forms the means by which the insulator is secured on the pin. The other end of the pin, B, has either a screw thread, d, cut upon it so that it can be screwed into the arm or other support on the pole or elsewhere, or this end is left plain to be driven into a hole made to receive it in the cross-arm or other fixture. Where this pin will have an upright position, as on the top side of a cross-arm, it can be readily driven into the wood; but, in situations where the screw fastening would be preferable, the end of the rod can have the screw, d, cut on it. In such case the body of the pin, B, may have a square or flat position, as in Fig. 3, to receive a wrench. To form the head or enlarge position b, that receives and holds the glass, A, I can proceed in several ways; but the simplest and least expensive method I have found is to place the end of the rod, B, within a suitable mold, and then pouring in the molten metal around it, the mold employed for this purpose having a groove or thread in its interior, so that the head, when formed, shall be similarly grooved or threaded to fit into the socket of the glass, A. A very cheap and ready means of forming the head is to use solder lead, and in such case the glass insulator itself could be used as a mold, the end of the pin, B, being held in the center of the socket in the glass, while the molten metal is being poured in around it. The soft metal will then form a head around and on the end of the hard metal pin, and the glass can be readily removed by unscrewing from the end of the pin. By forming an enlarged head in this manner upon the end of the pin, I can adapt my improved pin to the form and style of the insulator now in general use, having a socket to receive the end of the supporting pin. The advantages possessed by my improved pin are very great. It requires only a small hole in securing it to a cross-arm or other part of a pole, so that the part is not weakened at the point of fixture to as great an extent as where the wooden pins are used. It is out of contact with the inner sides or edges of the glass at the rim; so the insulation is more nearly perfect, and it will stand great weight and strain in supporting long lines, or where the distance between the supporting points are, of necessity, very long, and where the weight or strain is excessive, it will bend, and not break off.'

The claims of the patent are:

'(1) The wrought metal pin, B, provided with a soft metal head, b, which is grooved and threaded to fit into and engage with the socket in an insulator for supporting electric wires, substantially as set forth.
'(2) An insulator pin or support for electric insulators, having wrought-metal body and a screw thread head of larger diameter than the body of the pin, of cast metal, substantially as set forth.'

The application for a patent was made September 13, 1881. The state of the art at that time, as shown by the findings, was substantially as follows:

Glass insulators, screw threads on inside, were in common use in electrical appliances, for the purpose of attaching thereto the wires over which the electrical currents were conducted. These insulators were used by attaching the same to pins. The pins were attached to cross-arms, and the cross-arms were attached to poles or other objects, thereby forming the means of conducting electrical currents.

'The pins,' to quote from the findings, 'first used, were ordinary screw wooden pins, upon which screw insulators were attached. Such wooden pins were attached to cross-arms by boring a hole in the cross-arms, and placing therein the opposite end of the wooden pin. Wooden pins were for some places and purposes found objectionable, unsatisfactory, and defective. They were weak, and would not support long spans without being of such size as to weaken the cross-arms which in that case would not support the long span. In running the wire up and down steep inclines, they would, in wet weather, make a short 'circuit' with the edge of the 'petticoat,' and 'ground' the current. They afforded no method for overhead attachment. In lines where a slight interruption might cause great damage, they were considered too unreliable. In places difficult of access, * * * such as over mountains and sparsely-settled communities, the fact that they lasted but a comparatively short time rendered them undesirable. For the purpose of remedying the objections above stated to the wooden pin, numerous experiments were made by numerous persons prior to September 13, 1881. Among the instruments devised and employed for remedying these objections, there was prepared...

To continue reading

Request your trial
10 cases
  • National Hollow Brake-Beam Co. v. Interchangeable Brake-Beam Co.
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Eighth Circuit
    • 28 February 1901
    ... ... 707; Olin v ... Timken, 155 U.S. 141, 155, 15 Sup.Ct. 49, 39 L.Ed. 100; ... Klein v. City of Seattle, 77 F. 200, 204, 23 C.C.A ... 114, 118, 44 U.S.App. 741, 748. But where the ... ...
  • Blanchard v. JL Pinkerton, Inc.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Southern District of California
    • 13 May 1948
    ...was invention, or in arriving at its scope. McClain v. Ortmayer, 1891, 141 U.S. 419, 428, 12 S.Ct. 76, 35 L. Ed. 800; Klein v. City of Seattle, 9 Cir., 1896, 77 F. 200, 204; Grayson Heat Control v. Los Angeles etc. Co., 9 Cir., 1943, 134 F.2d 478, 481; Marconi Wireless Co. v. United States,......
  • Pevely Dairy Co. v. Borden Printing Co., 9744.
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Ninth Circuit
    • 20 October 1941
    ...the size of Spellman's device. Whether it does or not is unimportant, for mere change in size does not constitute invention. Klein v. Seattle, 9 Cir., 77 F. 200, 204; Keszthelyi v. Doheny Stone Drill Co., 9 Cir., 59 F.2d 3, 8; Oliver-Sherwood Co. v. Patterson-Ballagh Corp., 9 Cir., 95 F.2d ......
  • American Sales Book Co. v. Bullivant
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Ninth Circuit
    • 5 May 1902
    ...use is evidence of its utility; it is not conclusive even of that,-- much less of its patentable novelty.' In Klein v. City of Seattle, 23 C.C.A. 114, 77 F. 200, 204, this court 'The fact that a patented device has gone into general use, and has displaced other devices, is evidence of its v......
  • 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