Page:Federal Reporter, 1st Series, Volume 10.djvu/761

HART V. THAYER. T^fl �of the whole body in its devious path. The second claim of the reissue, if construed to mean anything more than the second claim of the original, so as to cover the defendant's pin, covers new matter not fonnd in the original, and is for an invention not shown in the original. That defence is set up in the answer. The only pin with a fastening forming part of its body, described or shown in the orig- inal, is a pin with a fastening punched out of its body. A pin formed with a fastening, which is part of the pin itself, is a form of descrip- tion ingeniously devised to cover a punched-out fastening, and also such bent fastenings as those in the defendant's pin. But the claim cannot be construed to cover any fastening but a punched-out fasten- ing, or one that is its equivalent. �The defendant's bent fastenings are not equivalents. Theyare an invention in a new direction, not based on the plaintiff's idea. As against the plaintiff's pin, the defendant's is patentable, and not an infringement of claim 2 of the plaintiff's reissue. The radical differ- ence between the two pins is that the principle of fastening is differ- ent in the two, the defendant's pin dispensing with all fastenings that are separate from the pin itself, or that are partly detached parts of the body as fastening devices separate from the whole body. As an incident of the difference in structure, and iliustrating it, no two portions of the defendant's pin on opposite sides of the shield are directly opposite to each other. The parts do not form the jawB of a clamp, as in the plaintiff's. The shield is held by virtue of the strength of the cross section of the pin, and not by the clamp- ing action of two directly opposite parts. �The bill is dismissed, with costs. ��� �