Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 8.djvu/164

 159 FEVXRJLL BBPOBTSK. ���Thb Coevallis Fbuit Go. v. Curban and others. (Oireuit Court, J). Oregon. August 5, 1881.) �i. Iirr IINGBMEITT. �A machine for drying fruit, which employs substantially the forms and D echanical contrivances of the one patented to William S. Plumraer, is an i ifringement of such patent, although in some respects it is an iuipiovement ' ipon the latter. �a. I TIDBNCB. �A patent ispriMa/aa« evidence that the patentee was the inventor of the thing patented, and of its novejty and utiiity. �Suit for Injunction. �Wallis Nash, R. S. Strnlian, and D. R. Kennedi/, for plaintiff. �Cyrus A. Dolph, W. R. Bilyeu,, and /. K. Weatherford, for defend- ant. �Deady, D. J. On May 22, 1877, a patent, numbered 101,072, was issued to William S. Plummer "for an alleged new and useful improvement in fruit-driei-s," for the term of 17 years ; and on Octo- ber 9th of the same year a re-issue of said patent, numbered 195,948, was made to him. The specification of the second patent states that — �"The object of this invention is to furniah an improved apparatns for dryiug fruit, which shall be snnple in construction, convenieiit in use, and ettVotive In operation, drying the fruit rapidly and evenly, and which shrJl be so con- structed that it inay be readily taken down, set up, and moved lioin place to place;" and that "the invention consists in the case provided in its lower part with a lining set at a little distance from its walls, the large door, the small door, the clesits or slides to recoive the fruit frames or trays, the doors, and the cover and cap to allow the inoisture-laden air to escape, to adapt it for use in drying fruit." ' ' �Having thus described his invention, he claims "as new" — "ihe case, A, provided in its lower part with a lining, B, set at a little dis- tance from its walls, the large door, G, the small door, H, the cleats or slides, I, to receive the fruit frames or trays, and the cover and cap, 1^ M, to allow the moisture-laden air to escaj)e, substantially as herein shown and described, to adapt it for use in drying fruit." �On December 1, 1879, the plaintili, the Corvallis Fruit Company, became the lawful assignee of said patents and improvements for the county of Linn, Oregon; and on Jannary 13, 1881, it brought this suit to restrain the defendants from infringing the same by the man- ufacture and sale of fruit-driers, in said county, "produced by the inventions and improvements described and claimed m said letters patent." On June 27th an application for a provisional injnnction ��� �