Home/Third Circuit/Levy v. Harris

Levy v. Harris

130 F. 711, 65 C.C.A. 113, 1904 U.S. App. LEXIS 4211
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit
DecidedJune 8, 1904
DocketNo. 42
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 130 F. 711 (Levy v. Harris) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Levy v. Harris, 130 F. 711, 65 C.C.A. 113, 1904 U.S. App. LEXIS 4211 (3d Cir. 1904).

Opinion

GRAY, Circuit Judge.

This is an appeal from the decree of the court below, in a suit in equity brought by the appellant, who was the complainant below, against appellee, defendant below, for infringement of letters patent No. 664,564, issued December 25, 1900, [712]*712to the appellant, for an improvement in a machine for grinding quills of feathers. The specifications of the patent state the object of the invention, and the details of the construction, so far as tve are here concerned with the same, as follows:

“My invention relates to certain improvements in machines for grinding the quills of feathers; and the principal object of the same is to provide a machine which is simple in construction and which will rapidly grind the ribs of the quill of the feathers and remove all pith from the same, leaving only the bone portion of stems with the web or vanes running from each edge, thus rendering the said, quill of the feathers soft and pliable and capable of withstanding considerable bending without the liability of breaking.
The invention consists in the construction and arrangement of the various parts, such as will be hereinafter fully set forth, and particularly pointed out in the claims made hereto.
In the accompanying drawings, Fig. 1 is a front view of a machine constructed in accordance with my invention. Fig. 2 is a side elevation of the same. Fig. 3 is a central sectional elevation taken about on the line 3, 3, of Fig. 1, and Fig. 4 is a detail sectional view illustrating the yielding bearing of the presser-roll.

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

Related

Ladd v. W. & H. Walker, Inc.
7 F.2d 72 (Third Circuit, 1925)
Union Paper Bag Mach. Co. v. Advance Bag Co.
194 F. 126 (Sixth Circuit, 1912)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
130 F. 711, 65 C.C.A. 113, 1904 U.S. App. LEXIS 4211, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/levy-v-harris-ca3-1904.