PECK, STOW & WILCOX CO. v. FRAY et al.

PECK, STOW & WILCOX CO. v. FRAY et al. (Circuit Court of Appeals. Second Circuit. November 15, 1898.) Patknts — Injunction. Appeal from the Circuit Court of the United States for the District of Connecticut. This causo comes here upon appeal from a preliminary order of injunction made by the circuit court, district o-C Connecticut. The patent Is No. 293,957 (February 19, 1884, to Robert E. Ellrich), for an improved pawl and ratchet, the claims declared upon being Nos. 2 and 3. A. M. Wooster, for appellants. W. E. Simonds, for appellee. Before WALLACE and LACOMBE, Circuit Judges. [MAJORITY — PER CURIAM.] PER CURIAM. It would seem that the patent, if sustainable at all, must be construed as an extremely narrow one. Manifestly, defendant’s device is not a Chinese copy of complainant’s, and appellant has introduced sufficient evidence of the prior art, as disclosed in patents, to overcome the presumption arising from the issuance of the patent, — at least, if it he construed so broadly •as to cover defendant’s device, which can he done only by a liberal application ■of the doctrine of equivalents. The patent lias never been adjudicated, and its construction upon ex parte papers is too doubtful to warrant the issue of a preliminary injunction. The order for preliminary injunction (88 Fed. 784; is reversed, with costs of this appeal.