No. 180.Circuit Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.
March 21, 1935.
Appeal from the District Court of the United States for the Southern District of New York.
On Reargument.
For former opinion, see 74 F.2d 679.
Hammond Littell, of New York City (Edmund Quincy Moses, Nelson Littell, and Clarence M. Crews, all of New York City, of counsel), for plaintiff-appellant.
Warfield Brown, of New York City (Donald L. Brown and Griffith Beems, both of New York City, of counsel), for defendants-appellants.
Before L. HAND, SWAN, and CHASE, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM.
Upon the plaintiff’s petition for reargument as to reissue patent No. 18,322, we have again carefully considered the question of validity, and we adhere to our former conclusion. Even if Elliott alone is not enough to anticipate claim 1, we cannot hold that invention was involved in making the adjustments necessary for the patent in suit out of parts shown in Brownson, Pitney, Elliott, and Kreuger’s first patent. The defendants’ new ground, of attack, based on failure to disclaim after Judge Hickenlooper’s decision holding invalid certain claims of the parent patent, No. 1,638,815, has not been considered, as it is not presented by this record.