Voorhees Rubber Mfg. Co. v. Macdonnell

• Decision Date: 04 April 1916
• Docket Number: 2075.
• Citation: 231 F. 741
• Parties: VOORHEES RUBBER MFG. CO. v. MacDONNELL et al.
• Court: U.S. Court of Appeals — Third Circuit

231 F. 741

VOORHEES RUBBER MFG. CO. v. MacDONNELL et al.

No. 2075.

United States Court of Appeals, Third Circuit.

April 4, 1916

Rehearing Denied April 14, 1916.

Appeal from the District Court of the United States for the District of New Jersey; John Rellstab, Judge.

Suit in equity by James MacDonnell and others against the Voorhees Rubber Manufacturing Company. Decree for complainants, and defendant appeals. Reversed.

For opinion below, see 227 F. 898.

Edwin J. Prindle, Arthur Wright, and Prindle, Wright, & Small, all of New York City, for appellant.

R. W France and Duell, Warfield & Duell, all of New York City, for appellees.

Before BUFFINGTON, McPHERSON, and WOOLLEY, Circuit Judges.

BUFFINGTON Circuit Judge.

In this case James MacDonnell and others, owners of patent No 981,208, granted to him January 10, 1911, for a pneumatic tire, charged the Voorhees Rubber Manufacturing Company with infringement of the second and fourth claims thereof. On final hearing the court below, in an opinion reported in 227 F. 898, held the patent valid and the claims infringed. From a decree so adjudging, the defendant took this appeal.

The patent in question concerns the self-healing of a punctured tire. The specification recites that this had been heretofore attempted, viz.:

'It has heretofore been proposed to make a pneumatic tire with a tread portion thickened and made of rubber which is held under compression, so that if the tire is punctured the hole will be immediately sealed up as soon as the puncturing body is withdrawn.'

It recited that in so doing nonstretchable stay strips had been used to cause the desired rubber compression, viz.:

'This construction has been secured by molding the tire tread in a normally depressed position and securing firmly to the exterior of the rubber body a stay strip of canvas or similar material, so that when the tire is inflated the nonstretching qualities of the stay strip will cause the rubber to be compressed.'

It then states that in these efforts the stay strips have been inelastic both transversely and longitudinally, viz.:

'So far as I am aware, in all prior attempts to make a tire of this type the stay strip or backing has been inelastic, both transversely and longitudinally.'

MacDonnell then states that this inelasticity transversely is essential, and that the change he suggests is to retain the transverse inelasticity, but to substitute longitudinal elasticity for prior inelasticity, viz.:

'My present invention is in the nature of an improvement on tires of this class and aims to provide a construction wherein when the tire is inflated the tread portion thereof is held against stretching in a transverse direction, thereby securing the desired compression of the rubber, while at the same time said tread portion can expand or stretch longitudinally to permit the tire to assume its inflated shape without subjecting the portion of the tire opposite the tread to any appreciable longitudinal compression. I accomplish my desired object by making the stay strip of such a character that it is incapable of stretching transversely, but is on the other hand capable of stretching in a direction longitudinally of the tire.'

It will thus be seen that the invention which MacDonnell disclosed embodied two features: First, an inelastic, nonstretching, transverse stay strip variously described as the 'nonstretching qualities of the stay strip,' 'inelastic quality in a direction transversely of the tire is essential,' 'held against stretching in a transverse direction,' and 'incapable of stretching transversely'; and second, as contrasted with this nonstretchable transverse stay strip, an elastic, stretchable longitudinal stay strip, described as 'on the other hand capable of stretching in a direction longitudinally of the tire.' These two features thus described in the specification are carried into claim 2 here in issue, viz.:

'A pneumatic tire of rubber

...