Eames v. Cook

8 F. Cas. 239, 2 Fish. Pat. Cas. 146
CourtU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts
DecidedDecember 15, 1860
DocketCase No. 4,239
StatusPublished

This text of 8 F. Cas. 239 (Eames v. Cook) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Massachusetts primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Eames v. Cook, 8 F. Cas. 239, 2 Fish. Pat. Cas. 146 (circtdma 1860).

Opinion

SPBAGUE, District Judge.

Upon a re-examination of the case, the view which I have taken of the patent and the application of the evidence which was given at the trial is as follows: The claim at the close of the specification of plaintiff’s patent is in these words: “The above-described arrangement or mode of applying a single cam and inclined plane, with respect to the foot and leg portions of the boot tree, whereby the said devices are made to first perform the function of setting the foot parts of the tree firmly into the foot of the boot, and next that of stretching the leg of the boot — the application of stretching mechanism directly to the upper part of the leg of the tree being rendered unnecessary.”’ This claim may be divided into two parts: first, the mechanism, and second, the effect or result attained by the mechanism. The first, i. e., the mechanism, is the arrange[241]*241ment or mode of applying a single cam and inclined plane. And this consists of two parts: First, the devices, and second, the mode of applying them. The mechanism, if it do not embrace all that is material in the plaintiff’s patent, is at least an essential part of it; and when inquiring whether any other machine is similar, we must ascertain whether it embraces both its elements, viz: the devices, and the mode of applying them.

[240]*240

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
8 F. Cas. 239, 2 Fish. Pat. Cas. 146, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/eames-v-cook-circtdma-1860.