Eibel Process v. Minnesota & Ontario Paper (261 U.S. 45, 1923 Feb 19)
Decision Parameters
- Case: Eibel Process v. Minnesota & Ontario Paper
- Type: [USEFUL, ALGORITHM]
- Date: 1923 Feb 19
- Code: 261 U.S. 45
- Court: Supreme Court
- Vote: 9-0
- URL: caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi-bin/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=261&invol=45
- Patent: 845224
Decisions It Cites
Decisions That Cite It
-
Parker v. Flook [437 U.S. 584, 1978]
Rules & Quotes
[USEFUL] {1} The fact that the Eibel pitch has thus been generally adopted in the paper-making business, and that the daily product in paper making has thus been increased at least 20 per cent. over that which had been achieved before Eibel, is very weighty evidence to sustain the presumption from his patent that what he discovered and invented was new and useful. ... The immediate and successful use of the pitch for this purpose by the owners of the then fastest machines and by the whole trade is convincing proof that one versed in paper making could find in Eibel's specifications all he needed to know, to avail himself of the invention.[ALGORITHM] {2} We think, then, that the Eibel patent is to be construed to cover a Fourdrinier machine in which the pitch of the wire is used as an appreciable factor, in addition to the factors of speed theretofore known in the machine, in bringing about an a proximation to the equal velocity of the stock and the wire at the point where, but for such approximation, the injurious disturbance and ripples of the stock would be produced. ... The Circuit Court of Appeals dwells on the fact that the use of the pitch of wire was not really the introduction [261 U.S. 45, 69] of a new factor in the solution of the problem, because the same result would have followed if the head of the flow box had been made greater, in order increase by gravity the speed of the stock. Doubtless this could have been done. There were difficulties, however, in such a method, when Eibel's application was filed, because in the then machines the flow box as supported by an apron over the wire, and the necessary addition to the weight of the stock in the flow box, in increasing the head, would have interfered with the free working of the wire.