Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 7.djvu/357

 UNION MKT. CAETBIDGE CO. V. U. B. CABIBIDGE CO. 345 �In Equity. �Causten Browne and Charles F. Blake, for compiainanta. �Benj. F. Butler and J. J. McDavitt, for defendants. �LowELL, C. J. Judge Shepley decided that the patent in suit, for heading eartridge shells, re-issued to Ethan Allen, the inventer, in 1865, No. 1,948, and extended to his widow and exeoutrix in 1874, and by her assigned to the plaintiff corporation, was valid, and he ordered an injunction and an account. 11 0. G. 1113. The accounting was delayed by the discovery that certain machines were used by the defend- ants which had not been brought into the case originally, and a seriouB question was made, and fully argued before me, as to -whether they were within the scope of the injunction. I held that those machines were so different from the machines enjoined that I could not properly deal with them on a mo- tion for attachment, and required the complainants to proceed by Mil if they desiredto enjoin them. �Afterwards, a petition for rehearing of the cause was filed, and the parties agreed that a rehearing should be had, but that it should not delay the accounting before the master. �In May, 1870, the master's report having been filed, the exceptions to it were argued at length for three days before Mr. Justice Clifford and me. At the same time it was ordered that the testimony upon the rehearing should be closed by a certain day in August, 1880, in order that we might hear the case before the October term at Washington. An argument upon the r&hearing was made for two days in September, before the same judges. The court gave leave to the parties to file further arguments, in print, by December, Mr. Justice Clifford saying that he should not be able to take up the case before the vacation at Christmas. Before the briefs were filed Mr. Justice Clifford unfortunately became unable to hear the case, and the parties agreed to argue it orally before me. Afterwards they filed printed arguments instead. This was, perhaps, the last case argued by our accomplished friend, the late Charles F. Blake. The arguments are now complete on all points. It has become my duty to decide. ��� �