Melville Fuller

Name: Olin v. Timken — Opinion of the Court
Author: Melville Fuller

Summary

“Olin v. Timken — Opinion of the Court”, is a work by Melville Fuller. It explores elements such as springs, bar and patent.

Quotes from Olin v. Timken — Opinion of the Court (Melville Fuller)

Melville Fuller, Olin v. Timken — Opinion of the Court

“ It is true that the Tilton patent, both original and reissue, showed the light ends of the springs secured to the side bars by links or swinging shackles, while the shackles were rigid in the Timken; but both these shackles were well known, and complainant cannot contend that the difference is material.
In short, the Tilton patent relates to a crossing spring with a pivot bolt at the intersection. The Timken spring is the Tilton spring with the pivot bolt omitted; but in the defendants' spring the two sections do not cross each other, and cannot have a pivot bolt at the intersection. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

Melville Fuller, Olin v. Timken — Opinion of the Court

“ Appellee's argument seems to be that the Timken patent should be so construed as to cover a double-sweep, sectional spring, having the attaching ends connected to the bottom of the buggy or cross sills at any point between the side and the center, crossing the center, bending downwardly for a distance, and then upwardly to be attached to the side bar; having a thick end for attachment to the buggy bottom, and a thin end for attachment to the side-bar shackle, the curve being such as to allow the body to move up and down without expanding the side bar ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

Melville Fuller, Olin v. Timken — Opinion of the Court

“ The springs are arranged to cross each other at the center of the cross bar, B, upon which the carriage body is placed, and their elevated or upper ends are permanently secured at the opposite ends of said cross bars by means of bolts and nuts, a. Each spring is provided with a socket, c, at the crossing point, and through said sockets, which are thus brought in line with each other, an axis or pivot bolt, D, is passed. A nut, b, is applied to the screw-threaded projecting end of the bolt for securing the same in place. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

Melville Fuller, Olin v. Timken — Opinion of the Court

“ Each spring is generally formed of two or more leaves,-a long lower leaf and a shorter upper leaf,-this construction being resorted to in order to obtain greater strength, and to enable the socket, C, to be more readily formed. * * *'
' (1) The combination of two springs, each composed of one or more leaves, and hinged together at their crossing point, and provided with an eye at one end to connect with the side sills of the running gear, and at the other end connected with the cross bar for supporting the body of the vehicle, substantially as described. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

Melville Fuller, Olin v. Timken — Opinion of the Court

“ The eavy ends are attached to the gear, and the light ends to the semielliptic spring or spring bar on which the vehicle rests; but obviously these springs could be interchangeably used for the springs shown in the Timken patent, and it would require no invention to attach them. ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

Melville Fuller, Olin v. Timken — Opinion of the Court

“ The original claims were changed in the reissue by the substitution in the first claim of 'cross piece attached to the body,' for 'cross bar for supporting the body'; and the word 'cross piece' for 'cross bar' in the third claim; and omitting the word 'and' after 're-enforcing,' and the substitution of the 'cross piece attached to the body' for the 'body-supporting bar,' in the fourth claim ”

[↩︎]

Source: Wikisource

Melville Fuller, Olin v. Timken — Opinion of the Court

“ The claims of the three patents, on which appellee's suit was based, were to combinations relating to side-bar buggies and wagons, the side-bar gear and buggy body being elements of each combination. These patents are as follows: First. No. 197,689, declared to be for 'improvement in carriage springs,' was granted to Henry Timken, November 27, 1877, upon application filed October 27, 1877. The drawings consisted of three figures: (1) A side view of a wagon body with a spring attached; (2) a bottom view of a wagon, showing the spring ”

Melville Fuller

Summary

Quotes from Olin v. Timken — Opinion of the Court (Melville Fuller)

Common terms

Similar works

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature