Case Name: LIBERTY v. CHAMPION-INTERNATIONAL CO.
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 1910-01-27
Citations: 175 F. 780
Docket Number: No. 839
Parties: LIBERTY v. CHAMPION-INTERNATIONAL CO.
Judges: 
Reporter: Federal Reporter
Volume: 175
Pages: 780–780

Head Matter:
LIBERTY v. CHAMPION-INTERNATIONAL CO.
(Circuit Court of Appeals, First Circuit.
January 27, 1910.)
No. 839.
Patents (§ 328 )—Infeincement—Papek-Dkyino Machine.
The Liberty patent, No. 629,696, for a latli-carrying device for paper-drying machines, claim 2, which specifies, as an element of the combination “hoppers for feeding the said laths,” must be read in the natural sense of the terms, and is limited to a machine employing a plurality of hoppers, and is not infringed by a machine having a single hopper.
[Ed. Note.—For other cases, see Patents, Dec. Dig. § 328.*]
Appeal from the Circuit Court of the United States for the District of Massachusetts.
Suit in equity by Saul R. Liberty against the Champion-International Company. ■ Decree for defendant (164 Red. 877), and complainant appeals.
Affirmed.
Joseph L. P. St. Coeur, for appellant.
Alexander P. Browne (Everett W. Burdett, on the brief), for appellee.
Before COLT, PUTNAM, and LOWELL, Circuit Judges.
For other cases see same topic & § number in Dec. & Am. Digs. 1907 to date, & Rep’r Indexes

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
An examination of the record as a whole, and of the file wrapper in particular, has convinced us that the learned judge of the Circuit Court was right in his "opinion that the defendant is correct in its contention that the claim should be read in the actual sense of its terms, and is limited to a machine employing a plurality of hoppers, and that the defendant has not infringed, since it has used only a single hopper and not a double feed."
The decree of the Circuit Court is affirmed, and the appellee recovers its costs of appeal.