The first claim was for : "The herein described improvement in, or connected with, pince-nez or double eye-glasses consisting of the combination with pince-nez or double eye-glasses the centres of the glasses of which are fixed, of rigid arms, d, hinged on the frames or glasses thereof, gripping bearers (or one gripping bearer), e, having oscillatory movement upon same, and springs by which said arms are pressed outwards and the gripping bearers on to the nose of the wearer; operating substantially as and for the purposes set forth." The second and third claims were for the combinations as shown in the drawings more specifically. A patent (No. 4280 of 1890) had previously been granted to the same inventor for similar improvements. In that specification the diagrams showed a rigid attachment of the arm d to the frame, instead of the coiled spring f of the later patent, the necessary play being secured by the arm d being elastic instead of rigid. The placquet was mounted on a hinge at its centre. The second claim was for "A pince-nez or double eye-glass wherein the relative positions of the foci-i.c. centres-of the glasses are constant or fixed, and the-i.e. hinged -gripping bearers are adapted to be moved or adjusted laterally, and pressed on to the wearer's nose by springs, substantially as set forth." This was an action for infringement of both these patents. It was proved at the trial that the advantage of keeping the centres at a constant distance was well known; so also were placquets hinged on to the focuses without intervening springs in pince-nez, in which spring-bridges were used helical and arched; so also were placquets rigidly attached to spring-arms in pince-nez with rigid bridges. Various forms of such contrivances were produced. Amongst other alleged anticipations, Borsch's American specification (1889) showed pince-nez in which the placquets were doubled on each side, in which the following passage occurs: “In Fig. 7 there is another form of cross-bar, which is provided with ears, ő', in which the nose-pieces are pivoted. I do not intend to limit myself, except where especially claimed, either to spring, bendable, or rigid metal for the parts carrying the nose-pieces, as either may be used at the will of the manufacturer. In some cases the wearer may prefer that these parts be of spring metal, while others may prefer that the metal may be capable of being bent to suit the nose, and depend upon the bridge for the spring." A rigid bridge was not mentioned, and the diagrams showed an arched one. The essence of the invention was the double placquet. It was contended for the plaintiff that the inventions consisted in the combination of the three elements of rigid bridge, pivoted placquets, and spring-arms. Held, that there was no invention to support a patent, as the alleged combination only gave to a well-known article an additional well-known feature (13 R. P. C. 730). Romer, J. (at p. 735): "In my opinion there was nothing novel in the application of that extra feature, or in the purpose for which it was applied. There was no difficulty in adding that additional feature, if so desired; certainly no invention was required to add it. In fact the evidence shows that workmen in the ordinary course of their work, before the date of the plaintiff's patent, have applied pivoted placquets to pince-nez, both with fixed rims and elastic rims. . . . In the case before me I am satisfied that there is no real invention to support a patent-no real step by way of invention. In my opinion to uphold such a patent as this would unduly hamper the trade of this country. We should have clouds of such patents, and no workman would dare to make the simplest addition in perfectly well-known articles" 1 On appeal the Court of Appeal upheld the learned judge's decision. Per Lindley and Rigby, L.JJ.: Borsch's device cannot be confined to an elastic bridge. Lindley, L.J.: "So far as the invention goes, so far as that idea goes, the thing unquestionably was incorporated in and published by Borsch. . . . After Borsch's specification to say that there could be a patent for the combination of a rigid bridge, with springs carrying a placquet which was hinged, appears to me to be going a great deal too far." It appears that from the point of view adopted in the older cases there was no facture" at all. See ante, pp. 30-33, 35. manu 1 1897. MONNET V. BECK, 14 R. P. C. 77 7. Construction-Erroneous Theory. 401 In 1892 a patent (No. 4677) was granted to P. Monnet for an invention of “the manufacture of new colouring matter or dyes." The specification commenced as follows: "The object of this invention is to manufacture new colouring matters, or dyes, which may appropriately be called 'anisolines," from the bodies known as 'rhodamines.' These rhodamines can be obtained by several processes, the general formula of which is :— "(M1 designates a monovalent metal.) "It is by substituting for this metal a simple alcoholic radical such as ethyle (C,H,), methyle (CH), amyle (CH), &c., or a compound alcoholic radical such as benzyle (C,H,-CH,), that I have succeeded in forming my new colouring matters or dyes, the constitution of which is: "I give these colouring matters or dyes the name 'anisolines,' on account of their analogy with anisols which are phenols in which the H of the hydroxyle is replaced by the alcoholic radical CH3, thus: 402 "The dimethyle-meta-amido-phenol enters into the constitution of the rhodamines and the dimethyle-meta-amido-anisol into that of the anisolines. ..CH OH CO- -O CH “The hydrochlorate of dimethyle-meta-amido-phenol-phthaleine is transformed into a potassium salt" in the following manner : 1 "Dissolve 10 kilos. of hydrochlorate of dimethyle-meta-amido-phenolphthaleine in 50 litres of boiling water, pour this solution into another boiling solution of 5 kilos. of caustic potass dissolved in 20 litres of water. The potassium salt is immediately precipitated in the crystalline state, more soluble cold than hot; it is separated by filtration of its boiling solution, drained and dried. About 10 kilos. of potassium salt is obtained. "TRANSFORMATION INTO ANISOLINE. "Six kilos. of potassium salt of dimethyle-meta-amido-phenol-phthaleine 93o C., and 3 kilos. of chloride of ethyle, or its equivalent or of a bromide or an iodide, or the equivalent of meta-amido-cresol-phthaleine dimethylated or diethylated, &c., 20 kilos. of ethylic alcohol at 93 of chloride of benzyle, are heated under pressure for four hours at a of chloride of methyle, temperature exceeding 100° C., preferably at about 120° C. drive After cooling, the product withdrawn from the autoclave is diluted with water, distilled to off the excess of chloride and to extract the alcohol; then there is added the amount of hydrochloric acid necessary to form the salt of anisoline, after which it is precipitated by sea-salt. dissolved in pure water and left to crystallize, or "The anisoline is precipitated by sea-salt." Further information was given as to the action of iodides, bromides, and chlorides under the same conditions. It was also pointed out that dyes might 1 be also obtained by the above process from the condensation The formula for the salt was here inserted. It is the same as that of the rhodamine base above given, with the substitution of K for H in both the hydroxyl radicles. 403 products of succinic, suberic, &c., acids with alkylized amido-phenols or amido-cresols. The claims were : "(1) The method or process of obtaining new colouring matters or dyes, hereinbefore called anisolines,' by substituting for the metal of rhodamine salts a simple alcoholic radical such as methyle, ethyle, or amyle, or compound alcoholic radical such as benzyle, as hereinbefore described. a I "(2) The carrying out of the method or process referred to in claim by the action of a simple or compound alcoholic chloride, bromide, or iodide on a rhodamine salt, for example a potassium rhodamine salt in presence of ethylic alcohol, the whole being heated under pressure for several hours at a temperature exceeding 100° centigrade, the product of the reaction being diluted with water, then distilled to separate the alcohol and drive off the excess chloride of ethyle, the hot solution having added to it hydrochloric acid, whereby hydrochlorate of an isoline is formed, which is precipitated by sea-salt, all as hereinbefore set forth. "(3) As new products, the colouring matters or dyes hereinbefore called 'anisolines,' obtained substantially in the manner set forth." This was an action for an alleged infringement of the above patent. were raised, besides that of non-infringement.1 The alleged infringement consisted in the carrying out of the process described in the specification of the following case, Badische Anilin, &c. v. La Société Chimique des Usines du Rhone (post, p. 405). The alleged invention and alleged infringement were both advances or improvements based on the manufacture of rhodamines as patented in 1887 (No. 15,374). The general formula 2 of a rhodamine is : (CH2),,,H formed by condensation of two molecules of meta-amido-phenol or its alkyl derivatives with an organic acid. In this formula m and n are 1 Only that part of the case is summarized here which is necessary to understand the main issue of validity. * The letters inside the hexagons denote the original atoms in the benzine rings. |