Sherman-Clay & Co. v. Searchlight Horn Co.

(after stating the facts as above). 1. The first question to be determined is the scope of the invention involv *90 ed in this case. In the application of Nielsen for a patent he set forth that he had invented certain new and useful improvements in horns for phonographs or similar machines, and that the object of his invention was to—

He described his improvement in the usual specification and drawings, from which it appears that the horn is provided at the smaller end with a nozzle piece, by means of which connection is made -with the phonograph or other machine. A supplemental piece is employed to connect the nozzle 1 piece with the larger or body portion of the horn, but these parts may be formed integrally. This larger or body portion of the horn is bell-shaped in form, and tapers outwardly gradually from the supplemental piece to the larger or m'outh end of the horn. The curve or taper of the horn is greater or more abrupt adjacent to the larger or mouth end of the horn. The body portion of the horn is described as composed of a plurality of longitudinal strips gradually tapered from one end to the other, and connected longitudinally so as to form longitudinal ribs, each of…