84 F. 887 | 2d Cir. | 1898
We agree with the court below that the patent in suit is not anticipated by the patent to Buck, that the combination of the first claim is not destitute of patentable novelty, and that the claim is infringed by the defendant’s machine. These issues are fully discussed in the opinion of Judge Coxe, who decided the ease in the circuit court, and it seems unnecessary to add anything to the views expressed by him.
The defense founded upon the equitable title of the Newtons to the patent is without merit It rests upon an agreement between