Lektophone Corp. v. Rola Co.

TMs suit is one of many to vindicate Hopkins’ patents, Nos. 1,271,527 and 1,271,529. In reports *759 thereof, to which Lektophone Corporation v. Brandes Corporation (C. C. A.) 20 F.(2d) 155 , opens the door, the description and details of the discovery and invention are sufficient, save some features material to the instant ease.

The patents were granted July 2, 1918, on applications, original and divisional, filed July 14, 1913, and April 17, 1918. Involved herein are claims 29 and 30 of the first patent, and claims 1 to 8 of the second. The defenses are invalidity and noninfringement, and the decision is that claims 29 and 30 are invalid, the others not infringed.

Claims 29 and 30 are for application of leverage, to the end that the tympanum’s vibrations or movements will be shorter than those of the style upon the record. The method is as old as Archimedes, its employment in infinite variety preceded Hopkins, and his use of it was analogous, mechanical, aggregation rather than combination, and not invention. See Concrete Co. v. Gomery, 269 U. S. 177 , 46 S. Ct. 42 , 70 L. Ed. 222 ; Concrete, etc., Co. v. R. C. Storrie & Co. (D. C.) 23 F.(2d) 134 . Moreover, Brown (British,…