Capital Cash-Register Co. v. National Cash Register Co.

70 F. 709, 17 C.C.A. 355, 1895 U.S. App. LEXIS 2542
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit·Decided November 7, 1895·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This appeal, which is from an order granting a preliminary injunction, involves the single question whether the defendant’s apparatus infringes the third claim of the patent in suit, sis Unit claim has been construed by the circuit court of appeals for the Third circuit. 3 C. C. A. 559, 53 Fed. 367. The contention for i he appelhmf is that its apparatus does not embody that of the patent, because it dispenses with the “mediate connection” between the drawer holder, D, of the patent, and the series of keys which is an element of claim 3. The drawer holder, D, is a lever, the rear end of which projects downward onto the drawer, and engages the rear end thereof; in other words, the thing which holds the drawer. The defendant’s machine connects such á drawer holder with the keys by the mediate connection of a frame carrying a horizontal crossbar which unites its ends. The mediate connection of the patent is any device by means of which the movement of the keys can be transmitted to the drawer holder. The frame with its horizontal crossbar of the defendant’s apparatus is such a device. It is quite immaterial that the drawer holder is made integral with the frame.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Capital Cash-Register Co. v. National Cash Register Co., 70 F. 709, 17 C.C.A. 355, 1895 U.S. App. LEXIS 2542 (2d Cir. 1895).

70 F. 709 (Capital Cash-Register Co. v. National Cash Register Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Wachs v. Balsam
38 F.2d 50 (Second Circuit, 1930)
Concrete Appliances Co. v. Gomery
284 F. 518 (E.D. Pennsylvania, 1922)
Weber v. Automobile & Accessories Mfg. Co.
190 F. 189 (U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Maryland, 1911)