` " c00KE...v; GLOBE FILES .00. 43
WHEELER, J. This cause rests upon patent for invention No. 202,412, .
dated April 16, 1878, issued to the orator for anximprovement in the con-
struction of collar and sleeve buttons. The lspeeiiication describes the
making of such buttons by striking up the post from the back, forming
them in one piece, thickening the post at the base for strength. and
soldering the head to the post. There are two claims,-one for the im-
proved process of constructing the button; and the other for the button,
whose tubular post and back are formed in one piece, and having the
metal thickened at the base of the post. The defendants’ buttons are
formed wholly in one piece, but without using the orator’s process. The
patent describes the prior method of making such buttons, which was to
make the head, back, and post separately, and then unite them by sol-
dering them together; and their defects, which were that frequently they
were imperfectly united. When well made, they were not essentially
different in form or function from those made accordingto the patent, or
those of the defendants. The thickening of the post at the base is not
material. They were generally strong enough there before; but, if not,
the strengthening of them at that place would be too obvious to support
a patent for doing that. The orator invented a mode of making such
buttons which was new and very useful, and for which he deservedly
had a patent; but the buttons, when made, were notnew, exceptrthat
they were made by that new mode. For them there was no ground for
a patent. In the old buttons the post and back were not formed of one
piece, but when they had been united, and become, with the head, a
· button, they were of one piece for the purposes of the button, as much
as if they had always been in one piece. The thing patented in this
part, ofthe patent was not new, and this part of the patent is, appar-
ently, invalid on that account. The Wood Paper Patent, 23 Wall.563;
Cochmm: v. Badische AmJ·i*n.dc Soda Fabrik, 111 U. S. 293, 4 Sup. Ct.‘Rep.
455; McKloskey‘v. Du Bois, 8 Fed. Rep. 710, and 9 Fed. Rep. 38; Mc-
Uloskey v. Hamill, 15 Fed. Rep. 750. A — , ~ ·
Leta decree be entered dismissing the bill of {complaint, with costs.
r Coomc v. Gnonn Finns Co. and others. ‘ 4
» (0*ircu.it Oaumi, B. D. New York. March 16, 1887.)
Pnmrrs ron INVENTIONB—PATENTABLE lNVENTION—LETTEB sun Iuvorcn Frm
-—“RE-ENFORCE P1EcE. " “ l ‘ ‘
Letters patent No. 282,275 lwere granted July 81,1888, to William A; Cooke,
Jr., for a letter and invoice Hle, the principal claims of rwhich were a combi-
nation of tape called a "re-enforce piece " and the attachment of tapes to gus-
sets in a certain manner. The said claims showed no new part or function
“ which was not known before, but merely a mode of strengthening such tiles
in _p1aces where they were previously weak, without retmiring more_ than the
skill of a good workman to reach the result obtained. eld, that said claims
of the patent did not cover any patentable invention, and a bill to restrain
infringement must therefore be dismissed.