Electric Gas-Lighting Co. v. Boston Electric Co.

139 U.S. 481, 11 S. Ct. 586, 35 L. Ed. 250, 1891 U.S. LEXIS 2400
CourtSupreme Court of the United States
DecidedApril 6, 1891
Docket232
StatusPublished
Cited by22 cases

This text of 139 U.S. 481 (Electric Gas-Lighting Co. v. Boston Electric Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of the United States primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Electric Gas-Lighting Co. v. Boston Electric Co., 139 U.S. 481, 11 S. Ct. 586, 35 L. Ed. 250, 1891 U.S. LEXIS 2400 (1891).

Opinion

Mr. Justice Blatchford

delivered the opinion of the court.

This is a bill in equity, filed in the Circuit Court of the: United States for the District of Massachusetts, on' the 1st of May, 1SS4, by the Electric Gas-Lighting Company, a Maine’ *482 corporation, against the Boston Electric Company, a Massachusetts corporation, for the alleged infringement of claims 2, 4 and 5 of reissued letters patent No. 9743, granted June 7, 1881, to the Franklin Electric Gas-Lighting Company, as assignee of Jacob P. Tirrell, the inventor, for improvements in electrical apparatus for lighting street lamps, etc., the original letters patent, No. 130,770, having been granted' to said Tirrell, August 20, 1872, and the application for the reissue having been filed February 21,1881. The plaintiff became the owner of the reissued patent by assignment on the 6th of May, 1882. The defences set up in the answer are prior Use, want of novelty and patentability, invalidity of the reissue and non-infringement. The Circuit Court dismissed the bill, (29 Fed. Rep. 455,) and the plaintiff has appealed to this court.

The alleged infringing apparatus is constructed under letters patent No. 281,345, granted July 17, 1883, to the defendant, as assignee of Charles H. Crockett, the inventor, on an application filed April 11, 1883, for improvements in. electric gas-lighters.

The only difference of consequence between the original patent, No. 130,770, and the reissue, No. 9743, is in the claims, the text of the two specifications being almost substantially the same, and the drawings differing only as to scale. The specification is as follows, words in the original which are omitted in the reissue being here enclosed in brackets, and words found in the reissue and not found in the original being printed in italics; small letters, which designate parts of the drawings, being printed in italics in both of the specifications:'

“Be it known, that I, Jacob P. Tirrell, a citizen of the United States, [of Charlestown], residing in West Somerville, in the county of Middlesex and State of Massachusetts, have invented certain new and useful improvements in electrical apparatus for lighting street lamps, etc., and I do hereby declare that the following is a full, clear and exact description of the same, reference being had to the accompanying plates of drawings. This invention relates to that class of electrical apparatus for lighting street lamps in which the current is successively thrown into the magnet at each burner, one after another; and *483 under this invention' the circuit-breaker is located at the burner, and, by the direct action ■ of the current through the magnet located at the burner, the circuit-breaker and the valve to let on or turn off the gas are both operated, and the current, after the opening or closing, as the case may be, of the valve to one burner, is completely cut off from the magnet of such burner and thrown into the magnet of [the] next burner, and so on. In the accompanying plates of drawings the present invention is illustrated. In Plates 1 and 2, Figures 1 and 2 are elevations from different .sides. In Plate 3, Fig. 3 is a partial plan view and horizontal section; Figs. 4 and 5, [detail] detailed views.

“ A in the drawings represents a gas-burner, to which B is the feed pipe, provided with two horizontal platforms, C and D, for carrying the apparatus of this invention; E [is] a TJ magnet horizontally located and secured on the lower platform, C, with the pipe B in and between the legs F of the magnet; G [is] the armature properly located with regard to 'the magnet E and secured to the lower end of an upright lever, H, turning upon a fulcrum at I of the feed pipe B; J [is] the circuit-breaker, secured [in] to the upper end of the lever H and projecting upwards to the plane of the escape of the gas from the burner; K, a postín upper platform D, and in electrical connection with the earth. At the upper end of .the post K is a horizontal platinum arm, A, against which rests the point a of the circuit-breaker J when the lever H is at ■ rest; L [is] a spiral spring applied to lever H to throw back the armature G from the magnet E; 0 [is] an upright arm. This arm O, at its lower end, is hung upon a fulcrum, d, of ■ an insulator block, e, on platform C, and at its upper end it is in a position to bear against the periphery of a sector-wheel,/’, fixed to the spindle g of valve in gas-pipe B; c [is] a bent spring applied to arm 0 to hold it against the sector-wheel f, and when escaping from the. periphery thereof, to swing it on its fulcrum. The arm O at P, between its two ends, is insulated. A is a finger-piece projecting horizontally from lower end of arm O. This finger-piece A, at its outer end, lies in a position between the two pins l and m, projecting horizontally *484 one above the other from the block e. The lower pin l extends wholly through the block e, and similarly projects therefrom [upon] from its other side, being there lettered as l2. The upper pin, m, only enters the block; but on the opposite side' of the block thereto a similar pin m?, is located, also only entering the block. Q is an ann similarly constructed, arranged and hung on the block e, to the arm O. This arm Q is in a position to bear upon the periphery of a sector-wheel, n, fixed to the gas-valve spindle g, and for its finger-piece h2 to lie in and between the projecting pins i2 and m2 of the block e. The sector-wheel n is back of the sector-wheel f. The two sector-wheels/ and n are of equal diameter, of an equal length of arc — that is, a half of a circle. The two together complete the circumference. The relative location of the sector-wheels/ and' n on the valve-spindle is such that with the arm O on the periphery of [its] the sector-wheel f the arm Q will be off the periphery of its sector-wheel n, and vice versa; and the purpose of the said sector-wheels is to turn their respective arms O Q so as to bring about a bearing between their respective finger-pieces h h2 and the lower pins 112 and also to allow the springs applied to the said arms O Q to react and bring their finger-pieces into contact with the upper pins mm2. R is a ratchet-wheel secured to gas-valve spindle back of inner sector-wheel n; and S a spring pawl hung to lever II and arranged from the movement of such lever to act upon the ratchet-wheel E to turn it in the direction of the arrow, Fig. 1, Plate 1. In lieu of a ratchet-wheel, a friction-wheel and clutch may be employed, such as shown in Fig. 5. M and N are wires leading from the electric battery employed. The wire M is to let on and the wire N to shut off the gas at the burner A. The current is thrown into the one or the other of said wires by means of a double switch such as is employed ordinarily in electrical gas-lighting

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

Related

In Re Staats
671 F.3d 1350 (Federal Circuit, 2012)
Varian v. Llewellyn
178 F.2d 997 (Customs and Patent Appeals, 1950)
Sontag Chain Stores Co. v. National Nut Co. of Cal.
310 U.S. 281 (Supreme Court, 1940)
Box Patents, Inc. v. Universal Paper Box Mfg. Co.
57 F.2d 66 (Eighth Circuit, 1932)
Otis Elevator Co. v. Atlantic Elevator Co.
47 F.2d 545 (Second Circuit, 1931)
Pierce v. Bell
239 F. 549 (S.D. New York, 1917)
American Automotoneer Co. v. Porter
232 F. 456 (Sixth Circuit, 1916)
Steiger v. Waite Grass Carpet Co.
213 F. 798 (Seventh Circuit, 1914)
Cotto-Waxo Chemical Co. v. Perolin Co. of America
185 F. 267 (Eighth Circuit, 1911)
McDowell v. Ideal Concrete Mach. Co.
187 F. 814 (Seventh Circuit, 1911)
L. & N. R. R. Co. v. Central Stock Yards Co.
97 S.W. 778 (Court of Appeals of Kentucky, 1906)
Cimiotti Unhairing Co. v. Bowsky
95 F. 474 (U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York, 1899)
Hillborn v. Hale & Kilburn Manuf'g Co.
69 F. 958 (Third Circuit, 1895)
Chicago & Alton Railroad v. Sanders
39 N.E. 481 (Illinois Supreme Court, 1895)
Chicago & Alton Railroad v. Sanders
55 Ill. App. 87 (Appellate Court of Illinois, 1894)
Huber v. Nelson Manufacturing Co.
148 U.S. 270 (Supreme Court, 1893)
Freeman v. Asmus
145 U.S. 226 (Supreme Court, 1892)
Topliff v. Topliff
145 U.S. 156 (Supreme Court, 1892)
Peoria Target Co. v. Cleveland Target Co.
47 F. 728 (U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Northern Ohio, 1891)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
139 U.S. 481, 11 S. Ct. 586, 35 L. Ed. 250, 1891 U.S. LEXIS 2400, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/electric-gas-lighting-co-v-boston-electric-co-scotus-1891.