Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 5.djvu/931

NOVELTY PAPÎiB-BOX CO. V, STAPLBR. 919 �by paying a pecuniary consideration for the assent of cred- itors, which is denounced by the Btatute. In this case, more on the ground of de minimi$ non cv/rat lex than anything else, I will allow it. Let the case be returned to the register for f urther action in the premises. ���NOVELTY PaPER-BoX Co. V. BtAPIiEE.* (Cir<Mit Court, D. New Jertey. Pebruary 8, 1881.) �1. Re-Issub No. 7,488— " Imfkovhmknt ra Papek Boxes." �Re-iasued patent No. 7,488, granted to the complainant, as the assignee of Henry R. Heyl, February 6, 1877, for " improvement in paper boxes," hdd, not to embrace more than the original patent indicates and suggests. �2. Samb— Flap-Locking Dkvicb. �Hdd, also, that the evidence shoTVB that there is nothing now in any of the instrumentalities used by the patentee, Heyl, ^except the interlocking the outer flaps of the ends of the box by his flap-locking dovice. �3. Samb— FLAP-TucKma Dbvice. �Hdd, aho, that Heyl disclaims, in his said patent, a flap-fastening device of tongues projecting longitudinally from the flap, and inserted and withdrawn in the Une of the opening strain, and theref ore com- plainant is estopped from asserting a claim for a ilap-tucking derice of that character. �-4. SaMB — CONSTBUCTIOIî. �Held, (Aso, that in view of the state of the art at the date of the .eyl invention, and the language of the specification, the proper and necessary construction of the complainant's patent is ioT a, flap-lock- ing device of laterally-projecting tangues entering corresponding slots, contradistinguished from afiap-tucking device of longitudinally- projecting tongues entering and withdrawn from slots in the line of the opening strain. �■5. Samb— SçcoOT Claim— CoNSTHUCTioN. �Hdd, also, that, if the second daim of the complainant's said re- issued patent be regarded as simply introducing the tongues or cor- ners without preserving the locking quality referred to, it is such a departiire from the original invention as to render the said re-issue invalid. �-«Reported by Wm. A. llcdding, Esq., Àf the Phlladelphia bar. ����