Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 8.djvu/615

 DETWEILEE V. VOEGB ^01 �3. SaME— SaME— SAMB— SAME— ESTOPPEL. �Where, in such a case, the owner of the patents is interested in increasing the proceeds of the sale of such property, and takes the chance of being bene- flted by the enhancement of the priee thereof arising from the presumption that the right to use the patented machines passes with the purchase and pos- session of them, and stands by and sees them sold without giving notice to the contrary, he will be estopped from thereafter claiming that the purchase did net carry with it the right to use such machines. �r. Van Santvoord, for complainant. �Chas. B. Evans and F. B. Cozzens, for defendants. �Benedict, D. J. The first action above mentioned is an action founded upon a patent issued to Edward C. Blakeslee for an improve- ment in machines for threading sheet-metal screws, No. 116,922, bearing date July 11, 1871. �The second action above named is founded upon a patent issued to Charles T. Newber and Frank W. Perry for an improvement in machines for forming screw threads on sheet metal, No. 145,893, bear- ing date December 23, 1873. The bill in the first suit claims that the defendants have infringed the first of the above-mentioned patents by using two machines, which in this case have been styled the Blakeslee threading machines. The bill in the second suit claims that the defendants have infringed the second of the above-mentioned pat- ents by using two machines, which in this case have been styled the Newber & Perry machines. The actions have been tried together, and will be disposed of together. �There is no dispute in regard to the identity of the machines used by the defendants, or the circumstances attending their use. Two points of def ence are presented, — one, a want of novelty in the inven- tion described in the patents sued on; the other, that the machines in question were sold to the defendants under circumstances that entitled them to use the machines. �The last point is the only point requiring attention on this occa- sion. The four threading machines in question constitute part of the machinery of a factory in Camden devoted to the manufacture of cans. They, together with much of the machinery, were purchased by the defendants at a judicial sale made under a decree of the court of chancery of the state of New Jersey. The circumstances attend- ing this sale are as follows : �In Mareh, 1872, the plaintif! in these suits became the owner of the Blakeslee patent. In January, 1873, he assigned this patent to Henry T. Johnson, who, on April 25, 1873, assigned the same to a corporation organized April 19, 1873, and styled the "Standard Union ��� �