Home/W.D. New York/Manzel v. Houde Engineering Corp.

Manzel v. Houde Engineering Corp.

25 F. Supp. 40, 1938 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1557
CourtDistrict Court, W.D. New York
DecidedAugust 23, 1938
DocketNo. 1902
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 25 F. Supp. 40 (Manzel v. Houde Engineering Corp.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, W.D. New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Manzel v. Houde Engineering Corp., 25 F. Supp. 40, 1938 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1557 (W.D.N.Y. 1938).

Opinion

KNIGHT, District Judge.

This is a patent infringement suit involving Claims 20 and 24 of Letters Patent No. 1,675,760 issued to Charles W. Manzel on July 3, 1928, covering an improvement in hydraulic shock absorbers. Title in the plaintiff is admitted. It is also admitted that the accused shock absorbers were manufactured by defendant, Houde Engineering Corporation, sold by that corporation to the Ford Motor Company, and thereafter sold by the defendant last named.

We are concerned in this suit with shock absorbers as used on automobiles. It is well known that the function of the shock [41]*41absorber is to check the rebound movement of the vehicle spring after it has been compressed by the wheels passing over an obstruction and retard the relative movement on the rebound stroke or downward movement of the spring. These checking movements have been brought about by two general types of shock absorbers: mechanical friction and hydraulic. The friction type is shown in what has been familiarly known as “snubbers” — embracing a friction strap wound around a brake drum carried by the body with the strap connected with the vehicle axle and maintained taut. That type is not now involved. In the so-called hydraulic type the movement is controlled or retarded by resistance to the flow of a viscous fluid through a relatively small passage. This flow is induced by the movement of a piston or rotor in a fluid filled chamber or cylinder. The piston or rotor is.connected for movement with the vehicle axle and the cylinder or chamber with the vehicle body.

Concededly hydraulic shock absorbers are not of recent origin and various types antedate the patent in suit. As pointed out by the plaintiff, the first patent was No. 845,088 issued to Hotchkin, February 26, 1907. As revealed by the prior art patents, there has been a gradual step by step development of shock absorbers since that time. The general principles of construction of the devices in suit have long been known. Manzel embodies the general type of structure of absorbers shown in Houde Patent No. 933,070 issued September 9, 1907, and Houde No. 1,087,017 issued February 10, 1914. With the exception of the valves, the Manzel and the present Houde structures are substantially similar.

In the Manzel shock absorber, a stator member is rigidly secured to the vehicle body. The casing of the absorber rotates about the.stator member counter clockwise on the bound stroke and clockwise on the rebound stroke. Two oil filled chambers are formed between the stator and rotor by the stator blade and the rotor blade. A reservoir for replenishing the supply of oil in the above-described operating chambers is found between the outside of the rotor and the cover plate of the shock absorber. On the bound stroke, oil flows from one chamber as it becomes smaller upon the movement counterclockwise of the rotor vane, passes through a port into the reservoir and then through a ball check valva into the other chamber, which is becoming larger as the rotor vane moves. Some oil also flows through the valve into the enlarging chamber. There is a little resistance to the movement on the bound stroke because of the size of the ports through which the oil flows. On the rebound stroke the rotor moves clockwise. As the second-chamber becomes smaller and the other larger as the result of this movement, the ball check valve is caused to close. The returning oil is forced to pass through the valve illustrated below:

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

Related

Monaplastics, Inc. v. Caldor, Inc.
264 F. Supp. 57 (D. Connecticut, 1966)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
25 F. Supp. 40, 1938 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1557, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/manzel-v-houde-engineering-corp-nywd-1938.