Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 9.djvu/117

 102 FEDERAL REPORTER. �imparted to the valve, which shall have only an axial movement, and thus twisting or friction of the valve shall be prevented. This swivel connection of spindle and valve is frequently used in structures where rotation of the valve is not desired. The faucet has gone into extensive use." �The claims of the patent are : �"(1) The screw-follower, H, in combination with the valve of a self-closing faucet, substantially as set forth, and for the purpose described; (2) the combination of the swivel, P, screw-follower, H, valve, K, and spring, 0, sub- stantially as and for the purpose described." �The defendants now manufacture and sell a faucet like the one the use of which was enjoined, except that the former swivel is pinned to the screw-follower, so as no longer to be a swivel, but to be an exten- sion of the screw-follower. �Had it not been for the history of the litigation, the defence of non-infringement would have been strongly pressed; but after the decision of Judge Shepley, and the admission of the defendant in the former suit in this district, it is useless to consider that question, ex- cept with reference to the point whether the swivel is induded in the first claim of the patent. It is obvions that it is not claimed in terms in the first claim, and that in the specification the two branches of the invention are distinctly set forth. �The principle of the patentee's self-closing faucet was a combina- tion of the several parts by which the valve was to be forced to its seat solely by the operation of the spring and the pressure of the water, and the valve was to be removed from its seat solely by the twisting of the handle of the screw-following apparatus. The screw was to do nothihg in forcing the valve to its seat. The spring was to do noth- ing in removing the valve from its seat. The inclines of the screw were so quick that the spring could immediately force the valve to its seat whenever the porson who was using the faucet released his hold upon the handle of the screw-follower. The connection between the screw and the valve must be by contact only, so that when the valve was returned to its seat the spring should do the entire work, and when the valve was forced away from its seat it should be afiected by pushing the valve. There could be no rigid connection between the valve and the screw-follower or the swivel. �The operation of the defendant's faucet is thus correctly described by ihe plaintiff's expert : �" I find the valve having a movement at right angles to the plane of the valve seat, which movement is controlled in the direction necessary for the closing motion to act by means of a spring, and is controlled in the opposite direction by means of a cross-head or handles attached directly or indirectly ��� �