Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 1.djvu/732

 724 FEDERAL REPORTER. �sults. The claim is limited to a specifie mechanical com- bination, and hence the patent can have no broader scope. �3. In the astute and able argument of the respondents' counsel the claim of the patent of 1867 is erroneously as- sumed to cover every means of accomplishing the proposed resuit. So broad a definition of it must certainly be dis- carded, for reasons fully discussed in O'Reilly v. Morse. As akeady stated, it is for a method of producing a certain resuit by means of mechanism described in the specification, under certain essential conditions. The mechanical agencies required to transmit the power of the auxiliary engine to the capstan are component parts of the method, and it canQot therefore be said that the use of Connecting mechanism sub- stautially different from that described in the specification ■would be an infringement of the patent of 1867, The same resuit may be produced if different means to that end are employed, without invading the patented method. Hence it is only the mechanical instrumentalities described and refer- red to in the claim, and those merely colorably different from them, which are within the protection of the patent. �4. The patent of 1866 is clearly for a combination of mechanical elements indicated in the claim, arranged and operating as described. The claim does not embrace ail the mechanical devices described as constituents of the method covered by the patent of 1867, and it includes others not described in the latter patent. In a mechanical or a pat- entable sense, then, the two patents do not cover the same invention. �5. But conceding that the invention claimed in the patent ot 1866 is within the scope of the patent of 1867 as one of the means adapted and intended to be used in effectuating the method claimed in that patent, is the patent of 1867, therefore, void? �The scope of a patent must be determined by its claims, and it does not necessarily cover ail the descriptive matter in the specification. The eiïect of the specification is to describe the invention claimed in such fuU, clear, and exact terms that any one skilled in the act to which it appertains oau ��� �