Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 5.djvu/374

 362 FEDERAL REPORTER. �greater weight. Eustic letters are employed, by which is meant, as the complainants allege, letters in which the nec- essary lines of the same represent the branches or trunks oi trees, unstripped of the bark, the ornamentation consisting of several separate leaves placed at intervais upon the lines of each letter, the lines exhibiting the appearance of the bark of a branch or trunk of a tree, which design is used for orna- menting button^, studs, lockets, and other articles of jewelry. Photographs of the improvement were taken directly from gold sleeve buttons, having leaves upon the lettera in actual relief, as given in the descriptive portion of the specification. Sufficient appears to show that the complainants were jewel- ers, and that for a series of years they had been endeavoring to produce an initial-letter sleeve button which would be more ornamental and better suited for ladies' wear. Proofs were introduced showing many such experiments,^ and giving a bistory of the efforts to that end, and an account of the time and expenses incurred for its accomplishment, ail of which resulted flnally in producing the patented design. Experienced witnesses testify that they know of no other design relating to this class of goods which has been as buu- cessful as the subject of the patent in controversy ; and the court is convinced that the invention is highly acceptable to the public and profitable to the patentee. �Want of novelty is set up in every form of pleading, not only in the form that the complainants are not the original and first inventors of the improvement, but that many persons had prior Imowledge of the thing patented, and that the same was previously described and sbown in certain speeifled printed publications. Attempt will not be made to examine the proofs in detail offered by the respondents in support of this def ence, as it would serve no useful purpose, and would extend the opinion beyond ail reasonable length. Kegulations and pro- visions applicable to the obtaining or prohibition of patents for inventions or discoveries, not inconsistent with the existing patent act, apply to patents for designs, without modification or variation. 16 St. at Large, 213; Eev. St. § 4933. Expert witnesses were examined by the respondents to prove that the ����