Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 7.djvu/233

 ENAFP »i J0B8SBT-, 881 �ends of the spring. The complainant claims the combina- tion of the sustaining springs, the ihooks, jcud the buckboard. He does not claim the swinging links, and it is evident from his specification that this part df the devioe ie not essen- tial, but that the ends of thejspring. can ijesifts weil directljf in the hook or sta'ple ak in the' iink, and perfortn the'func- tion aseigned to them of eiongating'or 're'ti''actin'g \fith the pressure at the center. �The defendants' spring rests ,a,t,eaf3h;end; iill^a metal plate!^ called a keeper, whieh is fastened to theihuckboard, and holds the end of the spring in its place, but permits it to play back and forward. It performs the same furietion of coœplain-- ant's hook'. It performs tHis function in the sanie way as complainant's, because it is located at the same place, and Controls the end of the spring in the^ same manner, as com- plainant's device. It can be'called a h'ook jdst as Sp'pro- priately as complainant's device can be calied a hook. 3^ej,fher of them are technically hooks. If the complainant had not been the first to introduce a spring which oompletely supple- ments th&elasticity of the buckbtiiatdv'rft ali 'parts of the buek- board, by being rigidly connected with the buckboard" at the center, but free at the endo tb' r^apou'd ■ to^'the movetoentd ■ at the center, it would be the duty of tHe ■<iourf to^ sean' uibre ctiticJally the device&'he has' employed io^gocoinpiiBe'' this resuit. If others before him had-ldcated tll6ispiing ashehfts; but' had used other devices'for cont¥olliiig' ite- aelibn at'lthfe ends, it would be necessary ■ to ■ mafk ' iWe pteoise point" (E departure between his devices and theitsr'-' But, as he WaS the first to employ it for the peouliar f unetioa it perfornis', he is to be prdtected, not only in the particular deVices which; he employ s for this purpose, but against all other de vices' which are the mechanical equivalents for his. I caE'not biit belie-ve that the complainant was thea'uthor'of ah impifovement of essential merit in buckboard wago'ns/ iand that the defend- ants have substftiitially appropriated Ma invention. �A dedree is ordered adjudgiug infringeiu'eiit of bu%h claims of complainant's patent, ma for an injuuotioBf and a^coutit^ ing, with eosts. . ' ' i ' ■' ' ' ��� �