Waterman v. Thomson
U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York
This was an action on the ease [by Henry Waterman against William S. Thomson and Charles H. Thomson], Tried by Judge SHIP-MAN and a jury, to recover damages for the infringement of letters patent [No. 21,286], for an “improvement in tempering wire and steel,” granted to plaintiff, August 24. 1858. [Reissued Peb. 14, 1865, No. 1,874.] The claim of this patent was as follows: “The process of hardening steel wire, or thin steel, in long sections, being kept under a longitudinal…
Read the full summary
This was an action on the ease [by Henry Waterman against William S. Thomson and Charles H. Thomson], Tried by Judge SHIP-MAN and a jury, to recover damages for the infringement of letters patent [No. 21,286], for an “improvement in tempering wire and steel,” granted to plaintiff, August 24. 1858. [Reissued Peb. 14, 1865, No. 1,874.] The claim of this patent was as follows: “The process of hardening steel wire, or thin steel, in long sections, being kept under a longitudinal strain by means of the wheels D D; while passing through the fire in the furnace C, the guide H, to conduct the wire…
1Opinion of the CourtShipman, District Judge
(charging jury). It is the duty of the court to submit to you the rules of law' which you are to apply to this case. This I will do very briefly.
The first legal question which is presented to us, is that which relates to the construction of the patent itself. What does it purport to secure to the plaintiff — a process, or a machine?
Por the purposes of this ease, I charge you, pro forma, that the patent purports to grant to the plaintiff the exclusive right to the process of hardening steel wire, and thin strips of thin steel, in long sections under tension, by means of the simple mechanism or…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Electrical Accumulator Co. v. Julien Electric Co.U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York · 1889
- Covert v. CovertU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Western New York · 1901
- American Writing Mach. Co. v. Wagner Typewriter Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1907