Jensen Can-Filling Mach. Co. v. Norton

67 F. 236, 14 C.C.A. 383, 1895 U.S. App. LEXIS 2742
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
DecidedJanuary 28, 1895
DocketNo. 134
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 67 F. 236 (Jensen Can-Filling Mach. Co. v. Norton) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Jensen Can-Filling Mach. Co. v. Norton, 67 F. 236, 14 C.C.A. 383, 1895 U.S. App. LEXIS 2742 (9th Cir. 1895).

Opinion

HANFORD, District Judge.

The proofs in the case consist of the several patents above mentioned, including specifications and drawings, incomplete models, and depositions of the complainant Edwin Norton, and of a patent expert named Melville E. Dayton. There is no evidence tending to prove, nor admission by the defendants of, the making, vending, or using of any machine, since the date of said patent No. 395,788, having the particular devices which are supposed to infringe claims 1, 3, 6, and 19 of said patent, nor does it in any way appear that the appellants threaten or have threatened or intend to hereafter, in any way, infringe said patent. Therefore, as to said patent, the decree is certainly erroneous.

As to the other claims, the pleadings and assignments of error relieve the case of all questions save and except the one general question, does the Jensen machine infringe the claims of the patents sued on? Upon this general issue the cause has been tried and submitted, except as to patent No. 395,788, and it is to be determined accordingly. The patents sued on, and remaining to be considered, all relate to devices for doing some part of the work of forming the bodies of tin cans, with interlocked side seams, and soldering the seams inside the can body as well as on the outer surface, and removing from the can body, and saving, all surplus solder; and the several combinations of devices described in the patents are capable of being- so connected as to work harmoniously together, and, by a continuous series of movements, automatically and rapidly act upon flat pieces of tin, converting them into cylinders with side seams perfectly interlocked, pressed, soldered, and wiped, and the cylinders or can bodies then passed on, to be acted upon by other machinery for putting on, crimping, and soldering the tops and bottoms, so as to work harmoniously, and produce finished cans, as stated.

[238]*238Of the patents to be considered, the first in order, because the oldest, is patent 2sTo. 250,096. This patent covers the machinery in the section of a can-making plant, which takes the can bodies after the side seams have been pressed, carries them forward so .as to bring the seams in contact with acid, then with molten solder, and then with a wiper for removing the surplus solder from the outside of the seams, and delivers them, completed, to the mechanism which performs the function of applying the heads. The elements of the invention are two parallel bars or rails, forming a track for the cans to move upon; an endless-chain carrier, to convey them forward upon the track; a track for the carrier; tanks for the acid and molten solder placed under the track for the cans, so as to apply first acid and then solder to the side seam of each can body as it passes upon the track with its seam downward; two parallel bars or guides placed above the track, and coterminous with the solder tank, for the cans to pass under, and to hold them down upon the track at that stage of their journey, so as to receive the full benefit of the solder bath; a wiping device to come in contact with the outside of the seams immediately after the cans have passed the solder bath, so as to remove the surplus solder while yet in a molten state; and a hood or guide made in shape to fit the part of a can body above the track, and press it downward against the wiper, while passing over it, without mashing or bruising the can body. The track is partly level and partly inclined, so that, the can bodies are in a horizontal position while passing the acid bath; then taken up a slight incline, to facilitate the dripping off of surplus acid; then carried on a level, so as to be in a horizontal position over the solder bath; and then up a second incline, to facilitate the wiping off of the surplus solder. In operation, the track upholds the can bodies; the two parallel, overhead guides hold them down, in contact with the molten solder in the solder tank; the carrier track upholds the carrier; a link of the carrier surrounds a can body, and engages the latter end so as to move it as the chain moves, forward along the track; the acid tank applies acid,, and the solder tank applies molten solder, to the seams of the cans, as they pass; the wiper rubs off the surplus solder from the outside of the seams; and the hood exerts sufficient pressure from above to compel the moving can body to rub against the wiper. Each of the devices described has a function, and is necessary to success, in the operation of the machine. The claims of the patent which are to be considered show, in connection with the accompanying specifications and drawings, each of said devices to be an essential part of the combinations constituting the invention. They are as follows:

“(2) In a machine for soldering side seams of cans, a track for the cans, a carrier to move the cans, and a solder bath, in combination with guides, M, M, substantially as and for the purpose specified. (3) In a soldering machine, a wiper, J, for the purpose of removing surplus solder from the outside of the can, in combination with a hood, K, for the purpose of holding the can in contact with the wiper, substantially as specified.”

To make-a case against the defendants of infringement of this patent, the Jensen machine must be shown to have substantially [239]*239the same combinations, including every one of the above-mentioned devices, or mechanical equivalents for any that may have been omitted. "Mechanical equivalents,” as that phrase is to be understood in this connection, are such devices as were known previously, and which, in the particular combination of devices specified as constituting the patented invention, can be adapted to perform the functions of those specified devices for which they are employed as substitutes, without changing the inventor’s idea of means.

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

Related

American Can Co. v. Hickmott Asparagus Canning Co.
137 F. 86 (U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Northern California, 1905)
Norton v. San Jose Fruit-Packing Co.
83 F. 512 (Ninth Circuit, 1897)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
67 F. 236, 14 C.C.A. 383, 1895 U.S. App. LEXIS 2742, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jensen-can-filling-mach-co-v-norton-ca9-1895.