Lowell v. Triplett

97 F.2d 521, 38 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 156, 1938 U.S. App. LEXIS 3819
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit
DecidedJune 11, 1938
DocketNo. 4261
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 97 F.2d 521 (Lowell v. Triplett) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Lowell v. Triplett, 97 F.2d 521, 38 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 156, 1938 U.S. App. LEXIS 3819 (4th Cir. 1938).

Opinion

SOPER, Circuit Judge.

This case involves cross appeals from a decree of the District Court in a suit for infringement of three patents relating to radio receivers operated by alternating electric current, to wit: Lowell and Dunmore patent No. 1,455,141 issued May 15, 1923 upon an application filed March 27, 1922, which for convenience is sometimes called the receiver patent; Dunmore patent No. 1,635,117 issued July 5, 1927 upon an application filed February 27, 1922, referred to as the grid patent; and Dunmore and Lowell patent No. 1,606,212 issued November 9, 1926 tipon an application filed March 21, 1922, referred to as the speaker patent. All of the claims of the receiver patent and of the grid patent in suit were held invalid for lack of patentable invention, and some of them because of improper disclaimers. It was also held that none of the claims of these two patents was infringed. The claims in suit in the speaker patent were all held to be valid and infringed. Cross appeals followed.

These patents were litigated in Dubilier Condenser Corporation v. Radio Corp. of America in the District Court of Delaware, wherein the receiver patent and the grid patent were held valid and infringed and the speaker patent not infringed, 34 F.2d 450; but on appeal the claims in suit of the receiver and grid patents were held invalid for want of invention, 3 Cir., 59 F.2d 305; 59 F.2d 309. No, appeal was taken by the plaintiff from so much of the decree as related to the speaker patent. Certiorari was denied, 287 U.S. 648, 53 S.Ct. 96, 77 L.Ed. 560; 287 U.S. 650, 53 S.Ct. 96, 77 L.Ed. 562.

Subsequently, the patentees filed in the Patent Office disclaimers as to each of the claims held invalid in the litigation in the Third Circuit, and then brought the present suit on these claims as modified and on other claims. The District Court dismissed the suit as to the receiver and grid patents on the ground that the disclaimers were improper; but found the speaker patent valid and infringed. This court reversed as to the receiver and grid patents but did not decide the appeal as to the speaker patent, and sent the case back to the District Court with leave to the parties'to introduce additional evidence, 4 Cir., 77 F.2d 556; and this decision was affirmed by the Supreme [522]*522Court, 297 U.S. 638, 56 S.Ct. 645, 80 L.Ed. 949. The appellate courts, however, did not consider the merits of the parents. The conclusions of the District Court upon the merits at the new trial are stated above.

The theory of the radio art is stated with admirable clarity in the opinions of the trial courts, which have considered these patents, and need not.be repeated here in detail. The aerial or antenna of the broadcasting station is caused to vibrate by an alternating electric, current of a high frequency assigned by the Federal Communications Commission, within a range from 550,000 cycles per second to 1,500,000 cycles per second, and thereby ether waves of like frequency are sent out in all directions. Such frequencies, termed radio frequencies, are of themselves inaudible, but they have a great range and the velocity of light, and their chief function is to act as carriers for the sound waves. These have much lower frequencies, termed audio frequencies, between 12 cycles per second to 16,000 cycles per second, and they are impressed upon the carrier waves at the transmitting station so that the latter are changed from a series of waves of uniform amplitude to waves of varying amplitude as modulated by the sound.

The receiving antenna intercepts the modulated ether waves and thereby electrical currents of identical frequency with the carrier waves are set up; and it then becomes the function of the radio receiving set -to take therefrom the audio frequency currents and apply them to the diaphragm of the loud speaker so that it will vibrate in accordance with -the audio frequency currents, send out air waves, and thus reproduce the sound. That part of a receiving set which selects from the modulated carrier waves their audio frequency components is spoken of as a detector or rectifier.

The receiving set must perform another service b'efore the voice can be heard. The modulated ether waves journey great distances through space and are very small when picked up by the receiving aerial; and so the currents which they induce must be greatly strengthened or amplified to be effective. Both functions, amplification and detection, are performed in modern radio art by the radio vacuum tube. The receiver patent in suit avails itself of this agency and discloses a set composed of three parts, a radio frequency section, in which the signal is received and amplified, a detector section, in which the audio frequencies are detected, and an audio frequency section, in which these audio frequencies are amplified and reproduced in the loud speaker. In each of the sections of the set a vacuum tube is employed although the patent indicates the use bf a crystal, such as carborundum, rather than a tube as a detector, a preference which the subsequent experience of the art has shown to be mistaken.

The tube consists of an evacuated envelope of glass or metal, enclosing at least two electrodes, the cathode or filament, and the anode or plate, the former being the negative and the latter the positive terminal of an electrical source, as the names imply. When the cathode -is heated by an electric current, it gives out infinitely small carriers of charges of negative electricity called electrons which stream across the tube to Jhe plate because they are attracted by the positive charge upon it. In earlier days the filament and the plate were energized by batteries, called A and B batteries respectively. Later the three electrode tube was invented which contains a third electrode, called from its appearance the grid, and usually placed between the filament and the plate. The function of the grid is to control the flow of electrons from the filament to the plate. In a modern receiving set, the radio frequency currents picked up by the aerial are conducted by wire to the grid of the first radio frequency amplifying tube. These signal currents are alternating and hence the grid is electrically charged positively and negatively many thousand times a second. It is customary also to give the grid a permanent electrical charge, most frequently a negative bias, supplied in the earlier sets by what was called the C battery. The charges upon the grid cause the field around it to vary accordingly and to affect the passage of the electrons flowing through this field from the cathode to the plate. It has been found that a change in grid voltage has much more effect upon this flow than a change in plate voltage. In addition, as the field of the grid becomes positive, more electrons will pass, and as it becomes more negative, less electrons will pass. In this way a heavy plate current can be pulsated by a small signal current on the grid. It thus becomes possible through the agency of the tube to add to the signal currents electric energy from a battery, or from an alternating house current, and thereby to amplify the signal currents and make them available.

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

Related

Berghane v. Radio Corp.
116 F. Supp. 200 (D. Delaware, 1953)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
97 F.2d 521, 38 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 156, 1938 U.S. App. LEXIS 3819, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lowell-v-triplett-ca4-1938.