Nieblo Mfg. Co. v. Preston

The facts are stated in Judge Thomas’ opinion, with which we agree, except that we wish to throw no doubt upon the validity of the patent. The scope of the single claim appears to us too narrow under well-settled rules to allow us to include the supposed infringements, though unhappily these really steal the heart of the invention. The crucial element is that described in the phrase, “surrounded by a marginal ball-retaining and supporting rim”; the whole claim being copied verbatim from a passage in the specifications (page 1, lines 30-41), which was itself substantially changed in the Patent…