US LAWS, STATUTES and CODES : Chan Robles Virtual Law Library USA Supreme Court Decisions | Resolutions : Chan Robles Virtual Law Library

ChanRobles™ Virtual Law Library™ |™   
Main Index Repository of Laws, Statutes and Codes Latest Philippine Supreme Court Decisions Chan Robles Virtual Law Library Latest Legal Updates Philippine Legal Resources Significant Philippine Legal Resources Worldwide Legal Resources Philippine Supreme Court Decisions United States Legal Resources United States Supreme Court Jurisprudence ChanRobles LawTube - Social Network

ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : DebtKollect Company, Inc. - Debt Collection Firm Intellectual Property Division - Chan Robles Law Firm

Philippine Supreme Court DecisionsChanRobles On-Line Bar Review

google search for chanrobles.comSearch for

CRAWFORD V. HEYSINGER, 123 U. S. 589 (1887)

Subscribe to Cases that cite 123 U. S. 589 RSS feed for this section

U.S. Supreme Court

Crawford v. Heysinger, 123 U.S. 589 (1887)

Crawford v. Heysinger

Argued November 29, 1887

Decided December 12, 1887

123 U.S. 589


Assuming that claims 1 and 2 of reissued letters patent No. 9803, granted July 12, 1881, to George W. Heyl, assignee of Henry R. Heyl, the inventor, for an "improvement in devices for inserting metallic staples," are valid, they are not infringed by the "Victor tool," made under and in accordance with letters patent No. 218,227, granted to William J. Brown, Jr., August 5. 1879, and a second patent, No. 260,365, granted to the same person, July 4, 1882.

As to claims 1 and 2 of that reissue, namely,

"1. The combination of the stationary staple support or anvil A', and the sliding staple guide B, with the reciprocating slotted or recessed hammer, operating to insert a staple

Page 123 U. S. 590

through layers of stock to be united and simultaneously bend over its projecting ends, substantially as and for the purpose set forth."

"2. In a device for inserting metallic staples, the combination of the staple guide B, anvil A', spring D, and reciprocating driver, provided with the knob G, the whole arranged to operate substantially as and for the purpose set forth,"

it must, in view of the language of the claims, and of the state of the art, and of the limitations imposed by the Patent Office in allowing those claims, be held that the staple support or anvil is required to be stationary, and the slotted or recessed hammer or driver to be reciprocating.

In the "Victor tool," the anvil is movable and the hammer or driver is stationary.

Bill in equity to restrain alleged infringement of letters patent and for an accounting. Decree for complainants. Respondent appealed. The case is stated in the opinion of the Court.

ChanRobles™ LawTube

google search for Search for

Supreme Court Decisions Philippine Supreme Court DecisionsUS Supreme Court Decisions



Browse By ->> Volume


Browse By ->> Year


  Copyright © ChanRobles Publishing Company | Disclaimer | E-mail Restrictions
ChanRobles™ Virtual Law Library |™