Page v. Myers
| Decision Date | 15 April 1946 |
| Docket Number | No. 11130.,11130. |
| Citation | 155 F.2d 57 |
| Parties | PAGE et al. v. MYERS. |
| Court | U.S. Court of Appeals — Ninth Circuit |
L. R. Geisler and J. S. Middleton, both of Portland, Or., for appellants.
Bardi G. Skulason, Ashley Greene, and David Sandeberg, all of Portland, Or., for appellee.
Before GARRECHT, HEALY and BONE, Circuit Judges.
The parties to this appeal are: the appellee, Henry Clay Myers, owner of U. S. Patent No. 2,090,874, which is hereinafter referred to as the Myers patent, and the appellants, A. S. Page and Ellen H. Page, copartners doing business as Page & Page Co., manufacturers and sellers of certain logging trailers which the lower court found to be infringements of the Myers Letters Patent.
The claims of the patent are four:
These patent claims were declared valid in an earlier case, Myers v. Beall Pipe & Tank Corporation, D.C., 36 F.Supp. 752, by the same lower court.
In the instant case, the District Court made findings, which have support in the evidence, that the art prior to the Myers patent, including U. S. Patent No. 2,001,839, issued to De Bou on May 21, 1935; Patent No. 1,338,546 issued to F. B. Allen on April 27, 1920; and No. 1,570,165 issued to I. J. Merrill on January 19, 1926; and the patent of the Republic of France No. 707,448 issued to Lagasche on July 8, 1931, did not cover any combination in a dual axle logging trailer of a transversely-extended frame, longitudinally-extending, pivotally mounted springs, pivotally mounted bolster or bunk, rub plates spaced a substantial distance from the king pin, and forked or straddle mounting of the springs. The lower court found there was invention in the Myers patent in the action of the rub plates, which distributes part of the weight outside of the springs in a three-point suspension, one on the king pin and two on the rub plates, and distributing therefrom the weight by four-point suspension to the springs and wheels by straddle or forked mountings of the springs.
This distribution of weight, the lower court found, gave more stability to the logging trailer, less tendency to swing, less torque on the axles, and greater loading capacity.
The pivotally mounted bunks were known prior to the Myers patent, the use or...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
FE Myers & Brother Co. v. Goulds Pumps
...Walker on Patents, (Deller's Ed.) Vol. 2, Sec. 247, p. 1212. Wire Tie Machine Co. v. Pacific Box Corp., 9 Cir., 102 F.2d 543; Page v. Myers, 9 Cir., 155 F.2d 57. "And a substitution which involves a new mode of construction, or develops new uses and properties of the article formed, may amo......
-
Faulkner v. Gibbs, 11667.
...Co., 9 Cir., 85 F.2d 628, 630; Hanovia Chemical & Manufacturing Co. v. David Butterick Co., 1 Cir., 127 F.2d 888, 889. 2 Page v. Myers, 9 Cir., 155 F.2d 57. 3 See Wire Tie Mach. Co. v. Pacific Box Corp., supra. See also Continental Paper Bag Co. v. Eastern Paper Bag Co., 210 U.S. 405, 416, ......
-
Myers v. Beall Pipe & Tank Corporation
...was tried and opinion rendered by this court on April 23, 1945. The Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirmed by opinion, Page v. Myers, 155 F.2d 57. Thereafter Myers filed several suits for injunction on account of alleged Thereafter the defeated party in the Beall case applied to th......
-
Fruehauf Trailer Co. v. Myers
...2,090,874 to Myers, appellee here, valid and infringed. See Myers v. Beall Pipe & Tank Corp., D.C.Or. 1940, 36 F.Supp. 752; Page v. Myers, 9 Cir., 1946, 155 F.2d 57. Appellant conceded at the bar upon oral argument that all claims of the patent in suit are valid, so only the issue as to inf......