Summary

Samuel Blatchford Gosling v. Roberts — Opinion of the Court

There is no suggestion in the specification of the original patent that the plate, E, is to be used, disconnected as its lower end from the step, or to be any other than a yielding plate, so arranged as to keep the door open and shut, in addition to acting as a step-cover and wheel-fender. The first claim of the reissue, if construed so as to cover the defendant's structure, is void for want of novelty, being anticipated by the old structures referred to. Moreover, if so construed, it is invalid as being for a different invention from any invention found in the original patent.
Source: Wikisource

Samuel Blatchford Gosling v. Roberts — Opinion of the Court

A represents the body of a carriage, B the rear wheel, C the door, and D the step; E is a yielding plate, which may be made of sheet steel, or other suitable material, and the upper end of said plate is hinged or otherwise secured to the door, C, whilst its lower end is connected to a bar, H, having an eye, h, which engages with a suitable aperture in the flange, d, of the step.
Source: Wikisource

Samuel Blatchford Gosling v. Roberts — Opinion of the Court

When the door is shut, the plate, E, closes up over the step, D, and this prevents the wheel from throwing dirt upon said step, as clearly shown in figure 2; but, as soon as the door is opened, the plate, E, turns on the pivot device, d, h, at its lower end, thus uncovering the step and serving as a fender to prevent the occupant's clothes from coming in contact with the hind wheel of the carriage, as represented in figure 1. The yielding plate, E, acts as a spring to hold the door either open or shut, and also prevents said door from striking against the wheel, when opened.
Source: Wikisource

Get perspective with Kwize: daily news enlightened by great literature