Schreiber & Conchar Mfg. Co. v. Adams Co.

• Decision Date: 15 September 1902
• Docket Number: 1,674.
• Citation: Schreiber & Conchar Mfg. Co. v. Adams Co., 117 F. 830 (8th Cir. 1902)
• Parties: SCHREIBER & CONCHAR MFG. CO. v. ADAMS CO. et al.
• Court: U.S. Court of Appeals — Eighth Circuit

117 F. 830

SCHREIBER & CONCHAR MFG. CO. v. ADAMS CO. et al.

No. 1,674.

United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.

September 15, 1902

Melville Church(Joseph B. Church, on the brief), for appellant.

M.M Cady and L.L. Bond, for appellees.

Before SANBORN and THAYER, Circuit Judges, and LOCHREN, District judge.

LOCHRENDistrict Judge.

The appellees(complainants below), owners of letters patent No 493,548, issued to Fay O. Farwell March 14, 1893, for stove damper, by their bill charge the appellant(defendant below) with infringement of said patent, in the manufacture and sale by the defendant of stove dampers, and pray for an injunction, accounting of profits, and damages.The answer attacks the validity of the patent, and alleges that Farwell was not the inventor of the device described in his patent and that before his alleged invention the same device had been known to and used by many specified persons and companies, and was described and anticipated in many designated prior patents.Infringement was also denied.Proofs were taken by both sides, including many of the earlier patents pleaded in the answer.On the hearing the charge of infringement was confined to the second claim of the Farwell patent.Decree was entered adjudging that the Farwell patent was valid, and that defendant had infringed the second claim thereof, and awarding an injunction and accounting of profits, with costs, from which decree this appeal is taken.

The evidence shows that the business of making adjustable stove dampers, to be used in repairing stoves and replacing disabled dampers, was so considerable that many devices were invented and in use, some of them being patented; the object being to provide a damper which could readily, and without the exercise of special skill, be fitted and adjusted to any ordinary cooking stove.Without following the various changes and improvements in such dampers, the state of the art at the time of Farwell's alleged invention may perhaps be sufficiently shown by considering patent No. 470,439, for stove damper, issued to Emery D. Nellis March 8, 1892.In his specifications he says 'I construct my improved damper in two separate parts,-- the damper plate, A, and the operating rod, B (see Fig. 5), with the means of securing them together.The damper plate, A, is, of course, constructed in outline of a shape corresponding to the flue space in which it is intended to operation.In one edge of the plate, A, are formed the oppositely projecting curved lips, C and D, which are adapted to embrace the body of the rod, B; the intermediate space between them corresponding to the size and shape of the body of the rod, B.To prevent the plate, A, from turning on the rod, B, about the axis of the same, when the damper is assembled, as shown in Fig. 4, I form a longitudinal tongue, E (see Figs. 5 and 7), in the concave surface of the lips, C, and a longitudinal groove, F, in one side of the rod, B, adapted to engage with each other and rotate the plate, A, when the rod, B, is rotated by the handle, G, on the end of the rod, B; about the axis of the rod as the center of rotation.The aforesaid construction * * * enables the damper rod or journal rod to be readily inserted endwise through the framing plates and damper, which facilitates the insertion of the damper when the stove is set up or in case of repairs.* * * The damper plate, A, is placed in the flue space, through which passes the current it is intended to regulate by the same; then the rod, B, is thrust through the groove formed in the edge of the plate, A, by the lips, C and D, passing it through the perforations formed therefor in the framing plates, L, of the stove, letting the groove, F, engage the tongue, E, until the perforation, H, coincides with the perforation, I, when the pin, K, is inserted therein, locking the parts, A and B, together.'

In this Nellis device, the perforation, H, just mentioned, is through the rod, and the perforation, I, through one of the lips of the plates; and the split key, K, is passed through both when opposite each other, to prevent the plate from slipping longitudinally on the rod.This is criticised as requiring the rod to be perforated after the location of the damper plate is ascertained, or the making of the rod with many perforations, and with liability then to vary from the exact place desired.But the substitution of a set screw or simple wedge would occur to any mechanic as a complete remedy for any such difficulty.So the longitudinal tongue, E, in the concave surface of the lips on one side to engage the single longitudinal groove in the rod is criticised as permitting the rod to be inserted from only one side of the stove.But if this was found objectionable the obvious remedy would occur to any mechanic to make that tongue in the central part of the cavity between the lugs or lips, and just opposite the edge of the plate, when the rod could be inserted equally well from either side of the stove.Neither of these slight changes would involve any invention.

In the Farwell patent the device is described in the specifications as follows:

'A is the blade of the damper, provided on its opposite lower edge with three or more lugs, B, B, which curve partly around the upper portion of the rod, C, and engage with the flutes or corrugations, D and E, in said handle, C, as shown more fully in Fig.2.This rod, C, has one end of the same bent at an obtuse angle, to form a convenient handle for operating the same.The rod, C, is of peculiar form, resembling an acute triangle slightly rounded at the angles, as shown in Fig. 2, with two flutes or corrugations, D and E, upon the sides opposite to each other, extending nearly the entire length of the rod, C, with which the lugs, B, B, engage, in such a manner that when the rod is inserted in the blade, A, and the lugs, B, B, are in the flutes, D and E, the width of the rod with the lugs will still be narrow,-- slightly narrower than the base of the rod,-- and will not prevent the damper from lying flat on the oven when turned down, and will also allow the rod to rest on the oven when the blade is turned and in use; thus preventing any air from passing under the rod, as is the case with those dampers where the lugs, B, B, clasp the whole of the rod.Through the blade, A, I pass the bolt, F, which prevents the blade from sliding on the rod when it is in position, and allows the blade to be set in any position on the rod.As these flutes or corrugations, D and E, run nearly the entire length of the rod, C, I am enabled to set the blade at any position along the handle to suit stoves required handles of varied lengths.'

Peculiar advantages are asserted from the ovate form of the rod, the smaller part of which above the grooves or flutes is grasped by the lugs loosely, so that the plate, when fastened by the bolt, may be made to stand inward from the center of the rod and come flat on the oven plate when turned down, while the larger lower part of the rod will, when the...