Morris v. McMillin
Decision Date | 17 November 1884 |
Citation | 28 L.Ed. 702,112 U.S. 244,5 S.Ct. 218 |
Parties | MORRIS and others, Ex're, etc., v. MCMILLIN and others, Adm'rs, etc |
Court | U.S. Supreme Court |
Rowland Cox, for appellant.
W. Bakewell and Geo. H. Christy, for appellees.
The bill was filed against the appellants to restrain the infringement of letters-patent granted to John S. Miller, one of the appellees, dated April 16, 1867, for 'a new and useful improvement in applying steam-power to the capstans of steam-boats and other crafts.' The invention, as described generally in the specification, consisted 'in connecting the capstan with the freight-hoisting engine or other engine of steam-boats by means of shafts and cog-wheels, so as to operate the capstan by steam-power instead of hand-power, as has been generally used heretofore.'
The specification then proceeded:
'The following is the descriptive part of the specification, which will be readily understood by reference to the accompanying drawings, in which the same letters refer to like parts in each:
The claim was as follows: 'Rotating a capstan placed on deck of a boat by means of an auxiliary engine, and capstan and engine are placed forward of the steam boilers of said boat, substantially as hereinbefore described, and for the purposes set forth.'
The first application for the patent sued on was filed July 23, 1855. Its claim was for 'the application of the steam-power of a hoisting or other engine of steam-boats, or other crafts, to the capstan, by communicating the power of the engine to the capstan by means of the shafts, G and H, and the bevel-wheels, c, d, e, f, g, h, or by any other means.' This application was rejected. On February 7, 1856, the application was amended by striking out the claim originally made and substituting the following: 'I do not claim the application of steam-power to the capstan as a principle, but what I do claim is: the arrangement and combination of machinery employed to communicate rotary motion to the capstan from the hoisting or other engine of steam-boats and other crafts, namely, the shafts, G and H, and the bevel-wheels, c, d, e, f, g, and h,' etc. This amended application was also rejected, and no change therein was made until February 4, 1867, when it was stricken out, and the claim of the patent sued on was substituted by way of amendment. During all this time the drawings and specifications of the first application remained unchanged, and are embodied in the letters patent.
One of the defenses relied on by the appellants to defeat the patent was that it was invalid for want of novelty and patentability. Upon final hearing the circuit court rendered a...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Seismograph Service Corp. v. Offshore Raydist
...83 L.Ed. 980; Saranac Automatic Machine Corp. v. Wirebounds Patents Co., 282 U.S. 704, 51 S.Ct. 232, 75 L.Ed. 634; Morris v. McMillin, 112 U.S. 244, 5 S.Ct. 218, 28 L.Ed. 702; Phillips v. Detroit, 111 U.S. 604, 4 S.Ct. 580, 28 L.Ed. 532; Slawson v. Grand Street P. P. & F. R. Co., 107 U.S. 6......
-
Handel Co. v. Jefferson Glass Co.
... ... 566; Roberts v. Ryer, 91 U.S. 150, 23 L.Ed ... 267; Penn. Railroad v. Locomotive Truck Co., 110 ... U.S. 490, 4 Sup.Ct. 220, 28 L.Ed. 222; Morris v ... McMillin, 112 U.S. 244, 5 Sup.Ct. 218, 28 L.Ed. 702; ... Blake v. San Francisco, 113 U.S. 679, 5 Sup.Ct. 692, ... 28 L.Ed. 1070; Royer v ... ...
-
Hall Laboratories v. Economics Laboratory
...U.S. 649, 17 Otto 649, 2 S.Ct. 663, 27 L.Ed. 576; Phillips v. Detroit, 111 U.S. 604, 4 S.Ct. 580, 28 L.Ed. 532; Morris v. McMillin, 112 U.S. 244, 5 S.Ct. 218, 28 L.Ed. 702; Saranac Automatic Machine Corp. v. Wirebounds Patents Co., 282 U.S. 704, 51 S.Ct. 232, 75 L.Ed. 634; Honolulu Oil Corp......
-
Love Tractor v. CONTINENTAL FARM EQUIPMENT
...U.S. 649, 17 Otto 649, 2 S.Ct. 663, 27 L.Ed. 576; Phillips v. Detroit, 111 U.S. 604, 4 S.Ct. 580, 28 L.Ed. 532; Morris v. McMillin, 112 U.S. 244, 5 S.Ct. 218, 28 L.Ed. 702; Saranac Automatic Machine Corp. v. Wirebounds Patents Co., 282 U. S. 704, 51 S.Ct. 232, 75 L.Ed. 634; Honolulu Oil Cor......