Pettibone v. Derringer
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Pennsylvania
This was an action on the case for an infringement of the plaintiff’s patent for “a new and useful improvement in boring muskets, pistols and rifles, by an auger called the ‘spiral groove’ or ‘twisted screw’ auger.” The specification states that this auger consists in the manner of making it, or the particular form or construction of the same, as also the mode of application.
Read the full summary
This was an action on the case for an infringement of the plaintiff’s patent for “a new and useful improvement in boring muskets, pistols and rifles, by an auger called the ‘spiral groove’ or ‘twisted screw’ auger.” The specification states that this auger consists in the manner of making it, or the particular form or construction of the same, as also the mode of application. It then proceeds to state the way in which the auger is made, and that the difference in the form of this improved auger from the common screw auger used for wood is, that the point or cutter is next to the shank, and…
1Opinion of the Court
WASHINGTON, Circuit Justice.
The first question is, what is the discovery for which the plaintiff has obtained a patent? He contends that it is for the twisted auger, made, formed, and used, in the manner set forth in the specification. The defendant insists that it is confined to the twisted auger, and to no more. These cases are always embarrassing, because the originality of the patentee’s discovery is almost always in issue, which involves not only the construction of the patent, taken in connection with the specification, which forms a part of it, but also a comparison between the…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Whitford v. Clark CountySupreme Court of the United States · 1886
- Hunter v. International Ry. Imp. Co.U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York · 1886
- Goodhue v. GrantWisconsin Supreme Court · 1845
- Whitford v. Clark CountyU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Missouri · 1882