Freedman v. Davoplane Bed Co.
Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
Appeal from the District Court of the United States for the Eastern Division of the Northern District of Illinois. Suit in equity by the Davoplane Bed Company.against Hyman Freedman and Nathan Freedman. Decree for complainant, and defendants appeal.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the District Court of the United States for the Eastern Division of the Northern District of Illinois. Suit in equity by the Davoplane Bed Company.against Hyman Freedman and Nathan Freedman. Decree for complainant, and defendants appeal. Appellants prosecute this appeal from the decree of the District Court finding claims 2 and 4 of patent No. 848,305, granted to Holmes, Bostrom & Bo-strom on March 26, 1907, ,for sofa-bed, to be valid and infringed by the two forms of appellants' sofa-beds, shown as “Plaintiff’s Exhibits. Defendants’ beds 1 and 2.” Claim 2 reads as follows, viz.:…
1Opinion of the CourtKohlsaat, Circuit Judge
(after stating the facts as above). The-main element of the combination patent in suit is that which makes provision for a bedding receptacle — -the three-section bed-bottom. By means of it, the bedding can be stored in a made-up form, so that, when ■ the sofa-seat is overturned -and the bed-bottom extended, the bed will be ready for occupancy. Other features are achieved, such as those which deceive the eye by the almost perfect representation of a device which is a sofa and nothing more. Other advantages are *75found in the ease with which the device may be manipulated, whereby it can be…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Railroad Supply Co. v. Hart Steel Co.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1915
3Cited by2 opinions
- Kramer v. CommissionerUnited States Board of Tax Appeals · 1933
- New Amsterdam Casualty Co. v. Marietta, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Washington County1961