Home/Sixth Circuit/Higgin Mfg. Co. v. Scherer

Higgin Mfg. Co. v. Scherer

100 F. 459, 40 C.C.A. 491, 1900 U.S. App. LEXIS 4279
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
DecidedFebruary 12, 1900
DocketNos. 700, 774
StatusPublished
Cited by7 cases

This text of 100 F. 459 (Higgin Mfg. Co. v. Scherer) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Higgin Mfg. Co. v. Scherer, 100 F. 459, 40 C.C.A. 491, 1900 U.S. App. LEXIS 4279 (6th Cir. 1900).

Opinion

TAFT, Circuit Judge.

This suit is brought upon patent No. 480,-093, issued August 2, 1892, to Henry Iliggin, for an alleged new and [460]*460usaeful improvement in band-shells for wheel hubs. The specification describes the invention as follows: C is a band-shell, preferably-of annealed brass, adapted to take over and closely embrace the band. The shell has an inturned flange, c, adapted to take over and into the point of the band, and a groove or depression, c1, adapted to take into a corresponding groove or depression b1, in the band. The shell is secured to the band by pressing it thereover until the depression in the shell takes into the depression in the band; the shell having sufficient spring to insure its closing tightly over the band. The joint thus made locks the shell in position, and affords a simple and efficient means of securing it in position without the use of special tools or machinery. The hub is more thoroughly protected, and a neater finish secured, when the shell is extended over substantially the entire surface, of the band, thereby protecting and concealing the joints of the bands, with their, fastening devices. By providing the inner end of the band with an annular shoulder or bead-ring, b, and causing the inner end of the shell to abut against that shoulder as shown in Fig. 3, the openings in the band are thoroughly protected, and an exceptionally clean-cut appearance is obtained. The bands may be mami-[461]*461factured with the grooves ready cut, or the grooves may he made in bands, not thus provided, by simple and inexpensive tools, thus enabling the carriage maker to apply the shells without the necessity of providing a stock of bands especially prepared for that purpose. Higgin claims as his invention:

[460]*460

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

Related

Luten v. Kansas City Bridge Co.
285 F. 840 (Eighth Circuit, 1922)
Krell Auto Grand Piano Co. v. Story & Clark Co.
207 F. 946 (Seventh Circuit, 1913)
Lange v. McGuin
177 F. 219 (Seventh Circuit, 1910)
Southern Plow Co. v. Atlanta Agricultural Works
165 F. 214 (U.S. Circuit Court for the Northern District of Georgia, 1908)
Co-Operating Merchants' Co. v. Hallock
128 F. 596 (Sixth Circuit, 1904)
Chinnock v. Paterson, P. & S. Tel. Co.
112 F. 531 (Third Circuit, 1902)
A. R. Milner Seating Co. v. Yesbera
111 F. 386 (Sixth Circuit, 1901)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
100 F. 459, 40 C.C.A. 491, 1900 U.S. App. LEXIS 4279, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/higgin-mfg-co-v-scherer-ca6-1900.