W F. & John Barnes Co. v. Vandyck Churchill Co.

• Decision Date: 10 March 1914
• Docket Number: 157.
• Citation: W F. & John Barnes Co. v. Vandyck Churchill Co., 213 F. 636 (2nd Cir. 1914)
• Parties: W. F. & JOHN BARNES CO. v. VANDYCK CHURCHILL CO. et al.
• Court: U.S. Court of Appeals — Second Circuit

213 F. 636

W. F. & JOHN BARNES CO. v. VANDYCK CHURCHILL CO. et al.

No. 157.

United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.

March 10, 1914

Appeal from the District Court of the United States for the Southern District of New York.

The following is the opinion of the District Court, by Mayer District Judge:

The suit is for infringement of United States letters patent No 862,861, granted to John S. Barnes, assignor of complainant on August 6, 1907, for a drilling machine.

The object of the alleged invention is 'to construct a drilling machine frame of great strength by the employment of a suitable diagonally arranged backbone or brace extending substantially parallel with the driving shaft.'

The single claim of the patent is as follows:

1 'In a drilling machine, the combination of (1) a base (2) a frame connected with the base, (3) a drill spindle supported by the frame, (4) a driving shaft having a driving connection with the drill spindle and located diagonally with respect to the drill spindle, and (5) a backbone or brace extending substantially parallel with the driving shaft and connecting the base with the upper portion of the frame.'

1, 2, 3, and 4 are old in the art. As to 4, see especially Dalin No. 462,397, November 3, 1891, and Wessman No. 697,581, April 15, 1902.

The sole question is whether invention is to be found in the combination with these old elements of a brace extending substantially parallel with the driving shaft and connecting the base with the upper portion of the frame.

Upright drills are constructed with the frame consisting of an upright column, having a lateral offset to bring the drill spindle over the work, and this offset receives the upward thrust transmitted from the drill through the drill spindle.

In heavy work, the thrust of the tool may create a tendency to bend the upright column in its upper portion if the work is placed on the table supported by the column or to bend the column and to upset or tip the column at its point of connection with the base of the drill if the work is placed on the base. Under such conditions, a brace is obviously necessary.

Unless there is a functional relation between the brace and other parts of the drill, the form of the brace and its position and direction are merely matters of mechanical skill.

The experts in this case (doubtless able men) are not practical workmen in this art, and their testimony amounts to...