Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 8.djvu/101

 WOVKN-WIBE MAIXBKS8 CO. V-, WIBE-WEB BED 00. 87 �WovBN-WiBE Mattebss Co. V. Wibe-Web Bed Co. �(Circuit Court, D. Gimneeticut. June 6, 1881.) �1. Re-Issub No. 7,704— Bkdstead Fkambs— Conbteuction— Infhingembht. �Re-issued letters patent No. 7,704, granted May 29, 1877, to "Woyen-Wife Mattres3 Company, for improvement in bedstead frames, limited as to its first claim to the language of the flrst claim of the original patent, austained as to its third claim, and hdd infringed as to such claims. �2. RE-IsstTB— Objbct. �It is competent for a patentee to restate his invention in a re-issue so as to point out and claim a characteristio feature which is not clearly stated in the original patent. �3. Anticipation— KnDENCE—PKBSUMiTiON Attaching to a Patent. �Evidence of anticipation, to overcome the presamption attaching to a patent, must be clear and sufflcient. The uiisupported oral testimony of a patentee that he made a number of devices, containing a certain alleged anticipatory clement, long prior to the controversy, but which was not ghown in his appli- cation for a patent for said device, and without producing a device containing such element, is not such evidence as would overcome the presumption which belongs to a patent. �In Equity. �Charles E, Perkins, for piamtiff. �Benjamin F. Thurston, for defendant. �Shipman, D. J. This is a bill in equity founded upon the alleged infringement of re-issued letters patent, issued May 29, 1877, to the plaintiff, as assignee of John M. Farnham, for an improvemetit in bedstead frames. The original patent was issued November 30, 1869, also to the plaintiff as assignee. �The first question in the case relates to the validity of the re-isaue, or to the construction of its claims ; for if the re-issue is not invalid, and if a literal construction is given to its claims without reference to the original patent, infringement of the first claim cannot be denied. The invention relates to a bedstead frame upon which is to be extended a flexible or elastic sheet or fabric for the support of the bedding. In the specification of the original patent the patentee said : �" The invention consists in the use of slotted or double-inclined end pieces, in which the ends of the fabric are clamped, and in the employment of longi- tudinal adjnstable standards, to which the said end pieces are secured." �The claims were as follows : �"(1) The inclined double end-bars. G, of a bedstead frame, arranged substan- tially as and for the purpose herein shown and described. (2) The standards, B, arranged longitudinally, adjustable on the side-bars of ,a bedstead frame, to permit the inclined end-bars to be set at suitable distance apart, as set forth." ��� �