Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 3.djvu/301

 the boards which form the pigeon-holes; and, second, the riveting or bolting of each frame to its four neighbors, to secure the frames to each other.

The important question in the case is whether this specification enlarges the invention by the introduction of new matter, and the re-issue is therefore rendered void. There-issue describes the invention in broader terms than were used in the original specification or in the original claims, and, therefore, putting a narrow construction upon the words "applied for," the re-issue describes a broader invention than was originally applied for, because the claims and specification were harmonious; but it describes the invention which the history of the art and the patent shows should have been applied for, and the same invention which, aided by the light which is thrown upon the original patent by the knowledge of the state of the art, we can see formed the subject of the original specification, but was there cramped within too narrow bounds, There is more matter in the re-issue than was contained in the original, and it is matter which presents the invention as consisting of two separate and independent features, whereas, by the original, it was presented as consisting of those two features in combination; but the original imperfectly described the invention which was really made, though it correctly described the invention which was embraced in the claim. Is such matter new matter within the meaning of the statute?

The principles by which this question is to be decided have been laid down in a recent decision of the supreme court as follows:

"These re-issues, being granted in 1872, were subject to the law as it then stood, being the act of July 8, 1870, the fifty-third section of which (reproduced in section 4916 of the Revised Statutes) relates to the matter in question. It seems to us impossible to read this section carefully without coming to the conclusion that a re-issue can only be granted for the same invention which formed the subject of the original patent of which it is a re-issue. The express words of the act are 'a new patent for the same invention;' and these