Yale Lock Manuf Co v. Berkshire Nat Bank Berkshire Nat Bank v. Yale Lock Manuf Co

• Decision Date: 05 May 1890
• Citation: 10 S.Ct. 884,135 U.S. 342,34 L.Ed. 168
• Parties: YALE LOCK MANUF'G CO. et al. v. BERKSHIRE NAT. BANK et al. BERKSHIRE NAT. BANK et al. v. YALE LOCK MANUF'G CO. et al
• Court: U.S. Supreme Court

135 U.S. 342

10 S.Ct. 884

34 L.Ed. 168

YALE LOCK MANUF'G CO. et al. v. BERKSHIRE NAT. BANK et al.

BERKSHIRE NAT. BANK et al.

v. YALE LOCK MANUF'G CO. et al.

May 5, 1890.

Edmund Wetmore and George Ticknor Curtis, for appellants.

W. C. Cochran, for appellees.

BLATCHFORD, J.

This is a suit in equity, brought January 29, 1879, in the circuit court of the United States for the district of Massachusetts, by the Yale Lock Manufacturing Company, a Connecticut corporation, and James Sargent and Halbert S. Greenleaf, composing the firm of Sargent & Greenleai, against the Berkshire National Bank, a national banking corporation doing business at North Adams, in Massachusetts. The suit was brought for the infringement of two reissued letters patent. One of them is reissue No. 7,947, granted November 13, 1877, to James Sargent, as inventor, for an 'improvement in combined time-lock, combination lock, and bolt-work for safes,' on an application filed October 8, 1877; the original patent, No. 195,539, having been granted to Sargent, September 25, 1877. Only claim 3 of reissue No 7,947 is alleged to have been infringed. The other reissue is No. 8,550, granted to the Yale Lock Manufacturing Company, January 21, 1879, on an application filed October 14, 1878, for an 'improvement in time-locks;' the original patent, No. 146,832, having been granted to Samuel A. Little, as inventor, January 27, 1874, and having been reissued as No. 7,104, to the Yale Lock Manufacturing Company, May 9, 1876, and again reissued to that company, as No. 8,035, January 8, 1878. Only claims 1 and 7 of reissue No. 8,550 are alleged to have been infringed. After the filing of the bill, and by agreement of the parties, Joseph L. Hall, of Cincinnati, Ohio, was admitted as a defendant. An amended bill was filed, and the bank and Hall answered it. As to both reissues, the answer denied that, before they were granted, the patents were inoperative by reason of a defective or insufficient specification; that any errors arose by inadvertency, accident, and mistake; that any reissues were necessary or are valid; and that the reissues were for the same in ventions as were shown and described in the original patents. It also set up want of novelty and non-infringement. After replication, proofs were taken on both sides, and the case was heard in the circuit court by Judge LOWELL. His opinion is reported in 17 Feb. Rep. 531. He held that claim 3 of the Sargent reissue, No. 7,947, was invalid, and ordered a decree for the plaintiffs as to claims 1 and 7 of the Little reissue, No. 8,550. On the 14th of August, 1883, an interlocutory decree was entered, adjudging reissue No. 8,550 to be valid, as to claims 1 and 7; that the defendants had infringed those claims; and ordering a reference to a master to take an account of profits, and to report damages. In July, 1884, the defendants were allowed to amend their answer by setting up an additional anticipation of the Little patent, proofs were taken thereon, and the case was reheard, before Judge COLT, on the new evidence. He affirmed the former decree, in an opinion reported in 26 Fed. Rep. 104. The master reported $60 damages in favor of the plaintiffs, and both parties excepted to the report. A final decree was entered on the 12th of February, 1886, confirming the report, overruling the exceptions of both parties, and adjudging a recovery in favor of the plaintiffs for $60 damages and certain costs, dismissing the bill as to the Sargent reissue, No. 7,947, and awarding a perpetual injunction as to claims 1 and 7 of the Little reissue, No. 8,550. From this decree both parties have appealed. Joseph L. Hall having died, his executors and trustees have been made parties in his place. The respective specifications and claims of the original Sargent patent, No. 195,539, and of its reissue, No. 7,947, are set forth below in parallel columns, the parts in each which are not found in the other being in italic. The drawings are the same in both.

ORIGINAL PATENT NO. 195,539.

'Be it known that I, James Sargent, of the city of Rochester, in the county of Monroe and state of New York, have invented a certain new and useful improvement in locks; and I do hereby declare that the following is a full, clear, and exact description of the construction and operation of the same, reference being had to the accompanying drawings, in which figure 1 is an elevation of my improvement applied to a safe-door. Fig. 2 is a section of the bolt of the time-lock. Fig. 3 is an inside view of the same. Fig. 4 represents detached views of the dial, and escape-wheel. Fig. 5 is a bolt constructed as integral with the holding-latch.

'My improvement relates to that class in which two independent locks are employed upon a safe, vault, or other door for the purpose of preventing the unlocking of the door-bolts until both locks have been unlocked. Combination or key locks have only heretofore been used for this purpose, so far as I am aware. As such locks are set on combinations, or operated by means of keys, burglars can force the holders of the combination or key to unlock the door, and hence such locks are not a perfect safeguard against robbery. Clock-locks have also been used upon doors for the purpose of opening the door only at a determined hour, thus placing it beyond the power of any person to open the door until that hour arrives; but, so far as I am aware, such locks have either been used singly on a door, (in which case, when the lock releases the bolt or other fastening, the door is unlocked, and may be opened by any one,) or else a time-movement has been combined directly with a lock i such a manner that the two really constitute but a single lock, in which case, if violence is applied to the lock, it at once destroys the efficiency of the time movement.

'My invention consists, primarily, in the combination, with the door-bolt, of a clock-lock and a combination or key lock applied separately upon the door, having each an independent action, whereby the clock-lock will not release its bolt until a certain determined hour, and when it does release its bolt the combination or key-lock still remains locked and secures the door.

'My invention further consists in combining a clock-lock with a combination or key lock, both constructed to be applied on a safe, vault, or other door, to operate in connection with the bolt-work of such door, said clock-lock being provided with a lock-bolt constructed with an opening or offset, which is automatically brought in and out of coincidence with the tongue of the door-bolt in such a manner that the door-bolt may be retained in an unlocked condition for shutting, and prevented from being withdrawn when locked until both locks have been unlocked; the prime object being that each lock shall have an independent action, so that the clock-lock will not release the bolt until a certain determinate hour, and when it does release its bolt the combination or key lock still remains locked, and secures the door.

'A represents the combination or key lock, and B the clock-lock. These locks are provided with bolts C, D, of any desired kind, against which strike the studs, a, a', of the tie-piece, E. When the locks are locked, the bolts hold said studs out, and both locks have to be unlocked to allow the door-bolt to retract.

'The locks, A, B, are separate and independent of each other, and complete in themselves, and may be located at any position on the door. The combination or key lock will naturally be located in line with the spindle that operates it; but the clock-lock may be placed anywhere, where space is best found for it, on the door, and the stud, a', of the door-bolt, which connects with it, may be lengthened, bent, or otherwise arranged to rest against the lock-bolt, in whatever position it may be, as shown in Fig. 1.

'In locking the safe or vault-door, some device is necessary to allow the door-bolt to remain back in the unlocked position until the door is closed, without interfering with the clock-lock.

'In Fig. 1 the bolt, D, of the clock-lock is constructed in two parts, D', D², turning independently on the same bearings, c. The inner part, D², has the socket, d, into which the stud of the door-bolt enters in drawing back. It is connected to the outer part, D', by a coiled spring, f, (Fig. 3,) resting in a cavity in the side of the outer part. The outer part is also connected by a similar coiled spring, g, with the fixed bearing, c. Instead of the spring, g, it may have a counterweight, g', (Fig. 5.) The spring, g, causes the outer part, D', to turn back or fall, so that the socket, d, of the inner part, comes in position to allow the stem, a', of the door-bolt to enter therein. When this is done, the outer part is turned up to engage the dog, (presently to be described,) while the inner part remains stationary, on the stem of the door-bolt. The door is then shut, and the door-bolt thrown out, and the tension of the spring, g, causes the part, D2

, to turn when released, thereby locking the door-bolt stops, by which the motion is gaged to bring the socket of the part, D ², in proper position in its throw.

'The device above described forms a part of the clock-lock, being the bolt of the same. In Fig. 1 is shown another device for the same purpose, situated outside the lock, which is the subject-matter of a separate application. It consists of a socket or bearing, h, attached to the tie-piece, E, of the door-bolt, and sliding on an independent stud, a', resting against the lock-bolt. A spring locking-pin, i, is used to connect the parts when the door-bolt is thrown forward to connect with the jamb. In this case the lock-bolt, D, may be made solid, and may be either of the turning or sliding kind.

'G is a dog for holding the lock-bolt, D, up in the locked position. It turns on an axis, k, and its point engages under a stop, l, preferably a roller, of the bolt when the latter is raised. It is...