No. 244.Circuit Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.
June 26, 1940.
Appeal from the District Court of the United States for the Southern District of New York.
On petitions for rehearing.
Petitions denied.
For former opinion, see 111 F.2d 1018.
Abraham Tulin, Reginald Hicks and Samuel Yudell, all of New York City, for plaintiffs-appellees.
Pennie, Davis, Marvin Edmonds, George E. Middleton, and H. Stanley Mansfield, all of New York City, for defendant-appellant.
Before L. HAND, AUGUSTUS N. HAND, and CHASE, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM.
The defendant appears to agree that in figure 11 of Fourniols the plate, as disclosed, was not of even thinness; and the disclosure was, indeed, at best very vague. This does not, however, change the result in the least. A shear-plate with angular slots will not make “area” shaving possible though uniform thinness be substituted for the taper. There is no patentable advance unless the slots are also parallel. Hence it would not have been an invention to make Fourniols’ shear-plate of even thinness on both sides of the line 16 in figure 10.
The petitions are denied.
Page 1008