Chain Belt Co. v. New York Scaffolding Co.
Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit
Appeal from the District Court of the United States for the Eastern District of Wisconsin. Suit in equity by the New York Scaffolding Company against the Chain Belt Company and Egbert Whitney. Decree for complainant* and defendants appeal. Appeal from decree awarding injunction and accounting for infringement by appellants of claims 1 and 3 of the TJnited States patent to Henderson, No. 959,008, May 24, 1910, for scaffold-supporting means.
Read the full summary
Appeal from the District Court of the United States for the Eastern District of Wisconsin. Suit in equity by the New York Scaffolding Company against the Chain Belt Company and Egbert Whitney. Decree for complainant* and defendants appeal. Appeal from decree awarding injunction and accounting for infringement by appellants of claims 1 and 3 of the TJnited States patent to Henderson, No. 959,008, May 24, 1910, for scaffold-supporting means. The claims are as follows: “1. A scaffold consisting in the combination of crossbeams, floor pieces extending between such beams, and a hoisting device…
1Opinion of the CourtAlschuler, Circuit Judge
(after stating the facts as above). 1. The claims are for a combination, no element of which possesses novelty, and the combination itself shows but slight advance over the prior art. Patent No. 854,959 (1907) to Murray presents all the elements of the Henderson combination, except the U-shaped bar forming the bottom of the frame in which the crossbeams or putlogs are laid. In Murray’s frames the side bars extend below the floor, and are bolted or riveted to the angle iron putlogs there shown. The frame has a revolvable drum extending between the sides of the frame, with handle and ratchet…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- New York Scaffolding Co. v. WhitneyCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1915
- Whitney v. New York Scaffolding Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1917
- New York Scaffolding Co. v. Liebel-Binney Const. Co.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1917
3Cited by1 opinion
- Lowell v. TriplettCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1935