Case ID: f_51/html/0762-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "\n      McKenna, Circuit Judge.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Johnson Co. v. Pacific Rolling Mills Co. Same v. Sutter St. Ry. Co.
    
      (Circuit Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.
    
    July 18, 1892.)
    Nos. 33, 34.
    Patents fob Inventions—Patentability—Invention.
    Letters patent No. 373,554, issued^ February 20, 18S3, to Tom L. Johnson for a street railroad rail, combining the principal features of the tram and T rails, but with a different disposition of metal and combination of parts, so as to allow the advantage of even fish plating, are void for want of patentable invention, as the change in form was merely the result of mechanical skill. 47 Fed. Rep. 580, affirmed.
    Appeal from the Circuit Court of the United States for the Northern District of California.
    In Equity. These are two suits brought by the Johnson Company against the Pacific Rolling Mills Company and the Sutter Street Railway Company, respectively, for infringement of letters patent No. 272,554,-issued February 20, 1883, to Tom L. Johnson for street railroad rails. The circuit court dismissed the bills, holding that there was no infringement, and that the patent was void for want of invention. See 47 Fed. Rep. 586, where a full statement of the facts will be found in the opinion delivered by Hawley, J. Complainant appeals.
    Affirmed.
    
      George Harding, George J. Harding, and Wm. F. Booth, for appellant.
    
      M. A. Wheaton, I. M. Kalloch, and F. J. Kierce, for appellee.
    Before McKenna and Gilbert, Circuit Judges, and Deady, District Judge.
   McKenna, Circuit Judge.

The patent in this case is for a form of street rails. The patentee in his specifications admits that rails embodying the general features of his rail were old, and we think his special form involved no invention. It was but an obvious application of what had preceded. Judgment is therefore affirmed.