MARLBORO WIRE GOODS CO. v. HOME ACCESSORIES CO.

• Decision Date: 27 February 1928
• Docket Number: No. 2180.,2180.
• Citation: 24 F.2d 498
• Parties: MARLBORO WIRE GOODS CO. v. HOME ACCESSORIES CO. et al.
• Court: U.S. Court of Appeals — First Circuit

24 F.2d 498 (1928)

MARLBORO WIRE GOODS CO. v. HOME ACCESSORIES CO. et al.

No. 2180.

Circuit Court of Appeals, First Circuit.

February 27, 1928.

George H. Kennedy, Jr., of Worcester, Mass. (Fowler & Kennedy, of Worcester, Mass., on the brief), for appellant.

Charles S. Jones, of New York City (J. Granville Meyers, of New York City, and Ray Henry, of Boston, Mass., on the brief), for appellees.

Before BINGHAM, JOHNSON, and ANDERSON, Circuit Judges.

BINGHAM, Circuit Judge.

This is a suit in equity for infringement of letters patent No. 1,580,847, applied for November 4, 1922, issued April 13, 1926, to Hector Moineau, for a wire receptacle, and more particularly such article as a soap dish. The patent is now owned by the plaintiff, the Marlboro Wire Goods Company.

The defenses are noninvention, invalidity due to prior knowledge by others, and noninfringement.

In its specification the patentee states that the object of its invention is "to provide a wire receptacle constructed from closed wire loops; in other words, a receptacle wherein each component element is in the form of a closed wire loop, so that there are absolutely no free wire ends, projecting at any point."

In describing the method or manner by which the receptacle is constructed, he says first the "wires are cut to suitable lengths. Thereafter each wire is bent into the form of a loop, so that its opposite ends are brought into end abutting relation, whereupon said ends are secured firmly together preferably by welding"; that, when this has been done, "all of the elements to form the receptacle will be in the form of closed wire loops," and then "these loops may be shaped" into frame and base loops; that, this having been done, the base loops are "secured to a rigid frame" loop by welding the curved surface of the ends of the base loops to the frame loop at the points of contact therewith. He further states that "the receptacle is constructed entirely of closed loops," and that "the ends of the wire of each element are united and every part of the construction is formed of endless curves."

Claims 1, 2, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10 are in issue. All claims in issue, except 8, call for "loops closed at both ends"; that claim speaks of them as "closed loops."

Claim 2 is fairly representative of the first five claims in issue and reads as follows:

"2. A wire receptacle embodying a closed frame loop and a plurality of independently formed elongated loops closed at both ends and extending transversely of the frame loop and welded to the opposite sides thereof."

Claims 9 and 10 embody the same elements as the other five, and the additional one of "means associated with said frame for mounting it on a firm support." The tenth claim also embodies the further element of "means associated with the ends of the frame and depending therefrom to form the end walls of said depressed body."

The court below found that the device of the patent did not involve invention and dismissed the bill.

The soap dish of the plaintiff's patent, so far as the claims in issue are concerned, is composed of two parts: (1) A frame formed by bending a loop of wire into a rectangular shape,...