33 F. 499 | U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York | 1888
This is an equity action for infringement founded upon letters patent No.-117,198, granted to Thomas Newman July 18, 1871,
“Tlie combination of an oscillating platform, arranged for operation by the weight of the draft animals of the car, with a switch, in the manner substantially as herein shown and described.”
The grounds of defense are—First. That the patent is void for lack of invention; second, that the defendant does not infringe; third, that the patentee was not the inventor.
The essential feature of the invention isa pivoted horse-railroad switch, shifted horizontally by the tread of the animals upon an oscillating platform. A structure so arranged that the horizontal movement of the, switch-tongue responds to the vertical movement of the platform, when trodden on by the draft animals, would seem to be within the claim. There is nothing disclosed by the record which makes it necessary to limit the invention to the identical apparatus or the exact location described in the specification. A large number of patents and exhibits have been introduced to illustrate the prior ’art. It is not necessary to examine these in detail as the subject may fairly be summarized in a brief statement. At the date of Newman’s invention switch-tongues, pivoted as in the patent, oscillating tables and devices for converting vertical to lateral motion were well known. The nearest approximation to the invention is an apparatus, which consists of a rocking platform located between the rails in such a manner that the driver by turning his horses to the left, if he desires to go to the right, depresses by their weight the left side of the platform, and elevates the right side, which forms the switch. The wheels of the car impinging upon the platform are shunted off in the desired direction. This structure was operative, perhaps, but in practice it was clumsy and unreliable and formed an obstruction to the ordinary traffic of the street. Furthermore, there is no evidence that it was ever used, except experimentally. Other exhibits show a laterally-moving switch operated by means of appliances located on the car and worked by the driver. In other words the art discloses several rocking platforms and several horizontally-moving switches, but the structures which show the platform do not show the switch, and those which show.-the switch do not show the platform. Newman’s combina
Tiie defense founded upon the New Orleans testimony has been carefully considered, but it is insufficient to defeat the patent. What New
The complainant is entitled to the usual decree.