# Appendix for Appellant — Parks-Cramer Co. v. American Monorail Co. (No. 533) > Briefs, arguments, decisions, and more. URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/brief%3Amicro_IA40386418_1577%3A3 ## Record - **Collection:** Supreme Court brief - **Document type:** Appendix for Appellant - **Published:** January 1, 1957 ## Text FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUTT. >a _~" -PARKS-CRAMER COMPANY, . Plaintif-Appellee. oe Cin. AcrioN No. 1072. Tees ’ AppeaL. From tHe Unrrep SratTEs Distarcr Courr Fon tux Wesrean Drerarct or Nowra Canouia. a _ APPENDIX OF APPELLANT. Crate, Rawouesan & Kamar, ate = Z | . $7 607-613 Law : ti Charlotte 2, sey "ae: Ano Det Ari | Tantarenno, Gamma, Paiucan & Por, 400 Law Charlotte 2, North Carolina, ek. a " Heanp, Sucrrn, Porven & Gairricx, 41 Tremont Street, , es nt Ge Boston 8, Massachusetts, es Arenee ac Attorneys Plaintif-Appellee. TABLE OF CONTENTS. = ‘> Complaint (Dec. 28, 1954) | la Answer to Complaint (Mar. 11,1955) . .— ., 2a - Notice Under Title 35, Section 282 (Jan. 4, 1956)" 6a DEFENDANT'S DEPOSITIONS. ibepedition of G. B. Holtzclaw (Defendant s Exhibit 6? We cbs cecnerhigea ia gears ERAS CS ee Ta Deposition of Robert H. ‘Brown (Defendant s Exhibit | VU) aes a Sa ee woo -s--=---5 nia tara biti ona ae eT 16a ap TRANSCRIPT OF pen.” | Appeasennes ede sine nen chan eaetel ca one 22a | ‘PLADEs WITNESSES. a & | ee _ Direct Cross Direct William B. Grainger == 23a «28a = 30a Roy 4. Tedd... Rt cet Lester IE Sarin wigciacnnwrnrinin at. Of Oe A Oth a r DEFENDANT'S WITNESSES. E. Forrest REI oe SOE Seon Sta 0= .-. ° 38a Robert S. Sessions edited toi a eae nk 10. 11. - Flexible Sleeve Cleaner Which Was Installed — ‘in Fayetteville iodicnahd acalaiminle deeds aie taatadei aaa 12. Holtzclaw Patent in Suit No. 2,524,797 _-.___ 19. 20. 24. 29. 31. 32. 33: 34. A. M. - ""_‘ PLAINTIFF’S EXHIBITS. Photo’of American Monorail’s Flexible Sleeve Cleaner Which Was Installed in Fayetteville _- Photo of Another View of American Monorail’s American Monorail’s Ad of Cleaner Charged to Infringe Patent in Suit ____.___.--_--__- = Photo of American Monorail’s Flexible Sleeve ‘Cleaner Installed in Trenjen Cotton Mills ____ - Hodge. Patent No. 2, 047, FE ain ome came Smith Patent No. 1,920, 768 SAD LE TOE! Stipulation Dated February 9, 1956 _..______ | Stipulation Dated August 31, DE icnceasinacationpneds Defendant’ s Interrogatories, September 15, : EPR nq nec icmenmccsngm enn medenh wines Interrogatory Exhibit No. 1-..___.________-- Interrogatory Exhibit No. 2__.___.______»__ Interrogatory Exhibit No. 4. $ ao -~=--------- _ Plaintiff's Answers to Interrogatories: Septem- ber 26, 1955 ___ awe ep eee qn en neneaaemed DEFENDANT'S EXHIBITS. Hodge Patent No. 2,184,880 _____ econpealiacen (In Part): Smith Patent No. 1,857,410 _.--._- 1 _ Memorandum Decision (Jan. 7, _— encientiesone —— (Jan. 18, } 1957). ee ea ee ae ~~ cmynen, ; ; | 7 ; la Civ. ines No. 1072. | he the- United States District Court: ’ Bow THE Westen District OF Nortk CAROLINA. | PARKS-CRAMER COMPANY, Plaintiff, Vv. THE AMERICAN MONORAIL COMPANY, | Defendant. sey ce rae 7 de ae COMPLAINT. Piled December 28, 1954.) 1, This action arises under the patent laws of the ~ United States, Title 35 US. Code. __ 2: The plaintiff Parks-Cramer Company i is a corpora- tion chartered under the laws of the state of Massachu- setts, is domesticated in the state of North Carolina and ‘Maintains a principal place of business in the city of . Charlotte in the Western District of North Carolina. The defendant The American MonoRail Company i is a corpora- tion chartered under the laws of the. state of Ohio, is \ domesticated in the state of North Carolina, with a desig- ‘nated process agent-in said state, atid maintains a regular and established place of business at 150614 Central Avenue in the city of Charlotte in the. Western District of North Carolina, and has committed infringing acts within said. . District. 3. On October 10, 1950 » Urlited States Litters Paten: No. 2, 924,797 were duly and legally issued.to Grover B. Holtzclaw for an invention entitled TRavELING CLEANER ror TEXTILE MACHINES OR THE Like, which Letters Patent have been assigned. to the plaintiff Parks-Cramer Com- _ pany, and which, since said time, have been and still are owned by said plaintiff. 2a : P ~ Anewer.to Complaint } «4. Tie dofendent has jndcinged ond otill is intiringine , Claim 6 of said Letters Patent by making, selling or using TRAVELING CLEANER For TextTrLe MACHINES OR THE Lsxs embodying the patented invention or by inducing such . infringement of said Letters Patent, and will continue to _ do so unless enjoined by this Court. ‘ 5. The plaintiff has placed the required statutory ~notice on all TRAVELING CLEANERS ror TEXTILE MACHINES or ‘tHe Lixe manufactured and suld by it-under said Let- ters Patent,No. 2, 524,797. : WHEREFORE plaintiff demands a siellanininy and final | _ injunction against further infringement by defendant and ' those controlled by the defendant, an accounting for . profits and damages and an assessment of costs ieee the” ; defendant. | . Panns-Caamns Company, By JOSEPH W. Grier, Jr.,. a S Attorney for Plaintiff. December 28, 1954. TALIAFERRO, Grier, PARKER & Por, Hearp, SMITH, Porter & CuirtTick, Of. Counsel. | | . ANSWER TO COMPLAINT. . _ (Filed March 11,°1955.) pee putin the defendant, The American Monorail Company, and for its Answer to the Complaint in the above-entitled action says: . bs 1. Defendant admits the atagntions of paragraph . 1 of. the Complaint. 2. Answering paragraph 2 of the Complaint, deiend- | ant admits that The American Monorail Company is a “> corporation oi the State of Ohio with an established place ~ of business in the City of Charlotte in the Western District . of North Carolina with a ee. agent .to receive Anaege to Complaint ’ . »' —_ Se process in North Carolina. Defendant j without knowl- edge of plaintiff's residence dr charter and therefore leaves - plaintiff to its proof. — Defendant denies that it hes committed infringing _ acts in the Western District of North Carolina or elsewhere in the United States and denies all other allegations of said paragraph 2 not specifically admitted. er Answering paragraph 3 of the Complaint, defend- ant admits that United.States Letters Patent No.. 2,524,797 issued to G. B.. Holtzclaw on October 10,, 1950, but denies that said patént was duly and legally issued and is without ~~ knowledge of said patents assigned to plaintiff end there- fore leaves plaintiff to its proof. 4, Answering paragraph 4 of the Ciinafanes, defend- ant denies the allegations’ ntained therein. . ps Ariswering paragraph °5.of the Complaint, defend- antis without knowledge of the allegations contained, therein and leaves plaintiff to its proof. : —§ Defendant denies that the plairitiff i is entitled | to ‘the | relief set forth in its prayer or for any relief. ~ _ 1. Further answering, defendant says, on ‘informdiion and belief, that because of the state of the art prior to the date of the alleged invention by~said patentee or more _. than one year before the filing of the application for said Letters Patent, plaintiff cannot now seek to obtain a con-. struction of claim 6 of said Letters Patent No. 2,524,797 sufficiently broad to cover anything manufactured, caused tc be manufactured, sold, installed, and offered, for sale _ and installation, by defendant. _ §&. Further affSwering, defendant says that said Let- _ ters Patent No. 2,524,797 is invalid my void for the foliow- . ing reasons: ( A) Because prior to the alleged invention or dis- covery of thealleged improvements in said Letters Patent _ described and rting to be patented, or more than one - year prior to si application for said‘ Letters Patent, the | — improvements, or all mere: and substantial part o : . oe Answet to Complaint gn prin Ceanieh Veil iin, gummi We annie. ‘0 following patents and printed publications: _ % - Unrrep STATES PATENTS ; Number Patentee Issued Z 57,008 W.H. Stone - Aug. 7, 1866. 386,153 - LF. Moeller July 17, 1888 490,269 A. Chisholm Jan. 24, 1893 553,291 H.Nicholsburg . _ Jan. 21, 1896 - 566,853. L.T. Foreman — Sept. 1, 1896 . 752,598 G. M. Schwend Feb. 16, 1904 1,158,079 W.F.Saunders - Oct. 26, 1915 1,169,990 - A.J.Neafie —- “Feb. ‘1, 1916 1,326,140 R. Robinson Dec. 23, 1919 1,486,163° F. Smelik. Mar. 11, 1924 "1,781,142 W. B. Walker , (6) Defendant's ibit. No. 2—Patent No. _ 2047558 marked for identification, . Q2h. Now you say you were thoroughly familiar with the cleaner of Hodge patent No. 2047558? A. Yes, sir. ~ ; Q22. From; what date? A. I don’t remember the dates. I had nothing to do with the patent end of it. — i Q23. Your connection was by way of building or ‘test- - ing? A.- Developing. Q24: Did you develop this: cleanse? A. Yes, sir: ~. Q25.. Tell us about that. How did it come about and what did you do? Was it your idea originally? A. No, not - the Hodge cleaner. _ .Q26. What did you deo in connection with it? A. I developed the cleaner in accordance with Mr. Hodge’ . idea. ) a You coristruicted this cleaner? A. All the math | ‘Deposition of G. B. Holtzclaw | | fo . | (7) Q28. Does that patent No. 2 correctly show the | Hodge cleaner you developed? A. Yeu, 1 think so. | — Q29. Was that cleaner used commercially? A. Yes, . ~ Q30. Over what period of time, mecwiinainiy? A. You mean the cleaner as a whole? It is still being used. Q31. When did you begin to use it? A. I don’t re- meniber the exact dates when we began to use it. , ; Q32. Is it still being used just as is? A. No, not just : as is. There have been improvements made from time to time. ©. Q33. Now that patent. Exhibit No. 2 is referred to in your patent here in suit No. 2524797. That is correct, isn’t it? A. That is-right. ° : Q34. Does your patent No. 2524797 disclose what you: - _ did'or does it disclose the ideas of some other people? A. Tt discloses the ideas of what I did. ~~ Q35. Over and above what was present in the Hodge _ patent’No. 2047558? A. It is applied to the Hodge patent. (8) Q36. Now the carriage and the housing with the fan in it in your patent are the same as in the Hodge patent are they not? A. The hood, fan, etc.,.are the same in the - Holtzclaw patent as the Hodge patent—the principle used. Q37. What’s the difference between the two patents? A. The difference between as I have seen it, is that.the Holtzclaw patent has a flexible cuff which comes down . below head room and is not injurious to operators and is’. formed in a'shape to project:air under the top of the creel _board and on the. top of the tapers to do cleaning that no traveling cleaner has heretofore done. _ _Q38. What was your object in adding those. inwardly turned cuffs? A. My object is like any research man’s‘job __ in trying to i improve his product and I knew for somé time _ _ We, or any traveling cleaner people, weren't nes, ‘sur- faces that weren’t directly in line with air. © '. . Q839. How did you determine that fact? By Michie at the spinning frames? A. That is right. - . Q40. Anybody could see where lint isanialetid on a frame couldn’t they? That is the way you discovered it? A. Yes, by. accumulation .of lint. . ee Fee aie * Deposition of G. B. Holtzclaw — s (8) Q41. You knew also that places’ in direct stream of air had no accumulation of lint‘on them? Isn’t thata | _ fact? A. Where portions of the frame were in direct con- ~ - tact with the stream of air, that is right. _ » Q42. In the machines of the Hodge patent, Exhibit No, 2, the outlets for the air are cdjustalil are they not? A. Yes, it was late de adjustable. Q43. They areighown. being made adjustable in this’ _patent? A. Tos, sir. . SE ee eee ae (11) Q58, Do I understand that it is your position ' that with the Hodge cleaner of this patent ‘Exhibit No. 2, there would be some places between the upper and lower creel boards which would be ‘out of the direct line of air from both of these ‘fozzles? A. Yes, in some cases that - creel board would be out of the direction of airstream. _ . {Q59. And those places out of the air stream would - perthit the accumulation of lint? A. That is right. (12) Q60. That was perfectly obvious to anybody ~ wasn’t it? A. It would be for them to see the ea tion oflint . : “- Q61. Since you ‘pieced’ accuniulation of lint on dther places by directing an.air stream on to. those places, wouldn’t it be obvious all you had to do to prevent accu- — of lint between the creel boards was to } places? A. That is righ€PThat’s what I chai ps dod& Direct air underneath boards, not i line with air streams. acne Q63.° Let’s limit ourselves to these two patents, Hodge ‘No. 2047558 and your patent here in suit. CHow much | amore space do you think your device cleans on a spinning frame than the Hodge device would clean? Let’s look at _ it this way, Mr, Holtzclaw. In the Hodge patent we have upper and lower creel boards,-Nos. 3 and 4 I ny ‘they are numbered? (13) A. That is right. : . Q64. I gather from your patent the ais you were concerned | with was better cleaning betweeri those two . if Deposition of G. B. Holtzclaw See ST ; lla boards? A. Not necessarily those two boards. The aie of the frame. Q65. You warited . better denne between those two ... boards? A. We got better cleaning. : Q66. Hodge did get some cleaning between those two boards? A. After a fashion, yes. Q67: You got more cleaning than he did?” A. Pnsol is © right. "Q68. So it is a. matter of degree, You get more ie : “mg than he did between those two boards? A. Yes, and other surfaces. | a ‘‘- . a .... (14) Q72. Let’s look for a minute at figure No. 2 of your patent and figure. No. 2 of the Hodge patent No. 2047558. .I think you also said that the. motor, the car- riage, the , the fan housing and the rigid ducts were the same in h machines, or substantially the same? A. Principally the same. do Q73. The operation is the same, isn’t it? in other noe the motor turns the fan and blows air out through * the conduit. The carriage runs along a track? A. Over the top of a frame; yes, sir. Q74. The only difference is that you hate put these flexible cuffs on the outlets from the main rigid conduit 7@ : A. The difference is the Hodge. cleaner terminates abowe : - head heights.. Q75. Your rigid parts terminate above head heights? A. Yes, sir. © Q76. Any difference ‘there? A. Principally I would say not. & * : Q77. You have added these flexible cuffs. ‘That’ s the - only difference isn’t it? A. That {8 right. (15) Q78. When you added these flexible cuffs, did . that change the operation: of the carriage, or the motor or the fan? A. No. - Q79. When you put these flexible hoses on, they didn’t ‘change the operation of any of the ‘parts in the Hodge patent? A. No. | . as If you put your flexible cuffs on ‘the Hodge ap- 12a + - 6 x - i a eee Deposition of Robert H. Brown DEPOSITION OF ROBERT H. BROWN. (Defendant’s Exhibit U.) Rosert H. Bhown, being first duly .s sworn, . and says: bani EXAMINATION BY Mr. Warts. * are * * . . (7) Defendant’s Exhibit . No. $—Patent No. - 201 1770 marked for identification. . | Q45. Are you familiar with the Hodge patent No. — 2128207? A. In a general-way. ’ _Q46. Do you know whether a ever built any cleaners as shown on that patent? A. I do not know. ££: Se (10) Q60. I assume you are familiar with the Miller & .Becker undetframe cleaner patent of the: American Monorail Company No. 2516475? . : - Defendazit’s Exhibit No. 6—Patent No. 2516475 | marked for identification. A. I have read it, yes, sir | Q61: Did you ever see one of the devices? A. Yes, sir. Q62. When did you see the first one? A. I cannot say what the date was. : Q63. Was it this year or last year? A. I would say several years ago. | Q64. Could you say whether or not before the date of ~’ _ issuance of the patent? A. I could not say. I would have to look at my records... .Q65. Can you say from your recollection oni it was before or after the issuance of the Holtzclaw patent . here in suit which was October 10, 1950? A. Sorry, | cannot say. | ~ Q66. At the time of issuatice of that Miller-Becker patent, Exhibit No. 6, did the Parks-Cramer: Company | Deposition of Robert H. Brown 17a have any underframe dlennes? (11) A. Not that we were . merchandising. Q67. At that time—up to that time, you iiet not com- mercialized the Moore or the Hodge underframe cleaner? | A. So far as I know we were not marketing any under- _ frame cleaner. Whether we did ever sell one of the Hodge =: cleaners I cannot say. | 5 ie 2 es eS - Qii. You heard the witness Mr. Holtzclaw, te.tify . this morning as to the commercial use of the Hodge odge pat-. _ ent No. 2047558? A. Yes, sir. —_ > Q72. He testified tint that hed been in use siace shout | the date of the patent, perhaps earlier and is still in use? * A. That is correct. } (12) Q73. You agree with’ Mr. Holtzclaw: that the _ Hodge patent showed outlets from -the blower housing : which could be adjusted to direct the stream of air to differ- ént places on: the spinning frames? A. Yes, sir. . -Q74. Is the operation of any of the apparatus of this | Hodge patent altered in any respect by the addition of the — “flexible cuff or nozzle shown in the Holtzclaw patent?" A Yes, any change you make in the outlets does have some effect. Q75. Does the presence of those culls alter the opera- tion of the motot of the Hodge device? A. No, it may re- _. quire to take a little more or Jess current. Q76. And the carriage runs the same before and after the cuffs are added? A. Yes. Q77. And the housing operates the same? A. I can’t see that that would /make any. difference. : . Q8. Now those flexible cuffs would operate just the same as they do now whether they were attached to the Hodge metal conduit or the conduits of some other kind? (13) A. To the extent they would deliver air, but the’ amount and force and direction depends on many factors. Q79. But air is delivered from the nozzle? A. Yes, Sir. ' : Q86. No matter where that air comes from? A. Any Seen | 5 . "Deposition of Robert H, Brown air delivered to the aanile would be delivered by the nozale. | : 2 * ee * * (14) Qas. Also in your. affidavit you rr" aia da Walker, Hodge and°Lawrence spinning frame cleaners were limited in their cleaning effectiveness. Do you agree with what Mr. Holtzclaw testified to, “namely in the Hodge apparatus, Exhibit No. 2, the blower did not completely. a clean all of the space between the two creel boards? —A. = ___agree-with that. . To ee | ID. Ral ye die ties th Wis totes ht _ patent in suit that there was somiewhat greater ——s ; _of that space between those ‘two creel boards? (15) A Yes, on most frames. It would vary in different frames. — -- Q90. But it-was a difference in degree? A. In some ‘frames it might be. In certain places you get no cleaning from the old style and pretty good with the new. So it is: - a little more than.a question of degree. : _ _Q91. So far as the showing of the two patents were concerned, it was a matter of degree? - ‘A. Yes, just a mat- ter of degree. Q92. You agree with Mr. Holtzclaw that any ane look- — - ing at.a spinning frame over which this Hodge blower was blowing could see whether-or not lint was accumulated? _ A. If called to his attention: Q93. A mill man wouldn’t have to have it called to his attention, would he? A. I am sure F don’t know.’ You'll have to have him answer that, /- — Q94. If you were in charge of a spinning frame would ~ you have to have somebody. call your attention to the fact that lint was accumulating an a certain place on it? A. Not if it-was objectionable to have the quantity of lint om that, was there. - , . (P6) Q95. There wasn't gthing unobvious. was there about directing a stream. of air at the place on the - spinning frame. where you wished not to have lint accumu- - “late? A. Well, I don’t know the technical meaning of the word “obvious” so I am not sure I can answer that ques- tion osmunatly. I better not try. | 3 Deposition of Robert H. Brown - 19a Q96. If you saw.,lint accumulating on a spinning frame in certain places and a blower preventing lint from accumulating on other places, would you want the-judge to think it would require inventive skill to see that you ‘could dislodge that accumulated lint if you direct air. _ stream at it? A. I don’t believe I would be interested in what the judge thought: . | ea Q97. Well—A. 1] ‘t want to be uncooperative ‘-I_don’t.quite understand the question. Perhaps you — better phrase it again. sete ena Q98. Here with the Hodge machine running over the ‘spinning frame I understand. lint might accumulate ‘at certain places between the top and bottom creel boards? A. Yes, ‘sir. oes 2: _ - (17) Q99. Assuming that that is the coridition and that it was true the lint accumulated because the air didn’t - directly strike those places, wouldn’t it have occurred to. you that if you wanted to dislodge that lint you would — have to blow the air. in both places? 4. It might occur to — me I would have to put another cleaner down there. to do it. ee j , _- Q100. T am not concerned with the number of clean-. ers you use. If you clean one place you can clean another. A. It might occur to me if I ‘had a source of air near the point ‘where it wasn’t being cleaned I might clean it by that air. : sai wlaniorhs ~, _Q101. But you could clean it regardless of the source Ke of the air? A. Yes, sir. enue | Q102. Are you familiar with instances in other arts where a rigid tube or conduit was supplied with a flexible _tubular outlet and through which fluid or solids. were — - Caused to flow? A. There are a number of them. I am familiar with a good many of them. ss “yagi - Q103. Did you ever see one of these Holtzclaw clean. » .€s shown-in the patent in’ suit? A. Yes, sir. a (18) Q104. Just like that? A. Approximately like that. This was made up very early in the development stage and we may not have used commercially this exact - Shape. It just dows an idea. - Q105. How:hing did Parks-Cramer make and sell ap- Posey age aupgrn ar sin itp By q. ais | cs a kt : il Hel | Hi 7 ial aa: 2 ek - sa“ « temas | aN Cross EXAMINATION BY Mr. Warts. Q. You stated you had an engineering degree. What degree de you have? A. B.S. degree in engineering. Bach- — elor of Scierice in industrial engineering. Q..I see. I understand you to say that before the ad- vent of erther the Walker or the Hodge traveling cleaner - about one-half of the time of the-spinner. was used in. cleaning the spinning machines? A. Yes, sir. — » 2a: cor Wiliam B. Grainger, Cross Examination @ Howe much of that time was saved by the Walker and the Hodge cleaners? A: The amount of time she her- self had to spend in (45) cleaning was reduced by approxi- many fifty percent, or cut to Py age one-half. —-’ . Q. Down to 20 percent of her time? A. Well, I will. say nearer 25. * » pe (47) Q. You said. that before the advent of the Hodge - and Walker cleaners, compressed air was used to clean . the frames. Was that piped in through pipes. and then re-. leased through a flexible hose, for example? A. It was— Yes, sir, it was piped in to the room to fixed locations in. the room; and a hose, very much like a common garden - . hose, it has been my experience, was used. That some- times had a metal nozzle on the end, and the air was di- '. pected chiefly in the lower areas of the wns for blowing . out the lint under there. Q. Did they use metal pipe for piping the air in? A. | That was brought to central locations ini the room, and - ’- then these long hoses, 50 feet or maybe 100 feet -OF 0." . bi are still used. . : - Q. What parts: ‘of the frame did you say were not - reached—Let me limit that. What parts of the creel por- . tion of the spinning frame did you say were not ade | ‘quately cleaned by the Hodge machines? A. The areas immediately beneath the creel boards here and _ and the bottom creel board. ? Oe 2 Se * . (48) Q. Do you know why it was that Hodge didn't | satisfactorily clean under those creel boards? A: My ex- perience with the Hodge cleaner was that the air being _directed downward did not curve inwardly and poms t trans- versely enough to get into those areas. «2. er oe eee (51) Q. And some of the air from those rigid nozzles also struck the spools of roving between the creel boards, Wiliam B. Grainger, Cross Examination 250° | didn’t it? A. Yes, sir.. You could get some to strike this portion here. Pe] . : “3. 8 x . * _ * > ~Q. Could you determine where the air stream was striking the creel boards and the other parts of the creel? . _A. Yes, sir. It was possible to determine in a very good manner where the air was striking. - . (52) Q. Just a matter of looking at it, wasn’t it? -A. Not altogether. In adjusting these: outlets, we would— . I have myself attached a string to the inside of the outlet _ here, and with the air coming from the outlet, the string would follow the air stream; and that is the best indicator I have had on the Hodge cleaner. There are other devices, but that is the one I use. Q. Couldn’t one simply by looking determine where .. the airstream didn’t strike the parts of the creel? In other - words, where the lint accumulated? A. It was possible to walk down or through a spinning room and by observing _. the creels you could see the accumulations of lint on the tapers of these bobbins under the creel board and under the middle creel board here, and there would be accumu- ’ - lations of lint on them. That was evidence that the air was _ ‘hot getting to them. _ ss ~ Q: You could see that. ai. by looking ‘at’ it? Aw You could see that by eye. — | Q. Are you familiar with the patent in suit? A. No, sir, I am not familiar with it. ‘Q. What does Exhibit 15 show? A. This is 157° Q. Yes, that’s 15. A. This shows the adaptation of the Holtzclaw improvement, the flexible extension here as applied to the Hodge unit here. Ap | ‘ Wal Se ee ae -(64) Q. What was the term or name you applied to - the apparatus, the cleaner, of Exhibit 15? Was that known . as the Holtzclaw machine? A. I don’t believe I can recall what we did refer to itas. poe Td gm eentinnns te call: 0 Hedge Glacmer alte: _ you sonneg the flexible cuffs to it? A. It was a Hodge V 6; is . m é Ya et ee . William B. Grainger, Cross Examination yer & with the Holtzclaw adapter and extended flexible sleeve. Q. It was a Holtzclaw sleeve'on it? A. Yes; sir. . Am Q. How. did the Hodge appara‘us of Exhibit I com- | pare with the apparatus of Figure 2 as far as the functions of the motor were concerned? A. The functions of the — motyr I don’t believe were changed. It was still propelling: - the unit along the track and generating the blasts of air. Q. Ard the air stream created by the fan in the Hodge apparatus of Exhibit 1 was blown.down through ‘the out- let conduits 14 end 15 just theSame as it was in the case of the cleaner of Exhibit 15? A. Yes, sir. | Q.. And when the air rgached the lower end of those outlets 14.and 15, it was then conducféd on down through the (65) rigid sections 18 in each of those instances, each _ of those machines? A. Yes, sir. Part of it went through _ . 18, and part of it would go through 19 in this photograph. Q. But in the Hodge machine of Exhibit,1, all of the air went through the two rigid sections at the ‘lower end of each of the outlet conduits? A. Yes, sir. ° s¥8u say when you came to this Holtzclaw flexible * cuff, -you sdld them to people who were using the Hodge: cleaners of Exhibit 1? A. Yes, sir. - -Q. And there they were used to replace two of the rigid sections of that cleaner? A. Yes, sir, two of the rigid - cuffs. . . _ | @ ae - * * * * . (66) Q. That carriage was propelled along the track ‘in both instances—that is, Exhibit 1 and Exhibit .15—by the same motor; and the fan was rotated in the same way - in each instance; and the air was blown down. through | the outlet conduits 14 and 15 the: same way; and it-was . discharged through those rigid sections 18 in the same ~ outlet. way, whether there was a flexible cuff on there or not. Isn't that true? A. Yes, ‘sir, they. — from that , Q. So that adding the flexible cuffs, or substituting . them for — sections, didn’t change the operation of the ‘William B. Grainger, Cross Examination ; 27m cleaner? A. It still performed the mechanical function of traversing the track and generating the air. ipa ¥ Q. Blowing out— A. Blowing it out through the out- lets. Dees pode | .Q. Did plaintiff ever make a so-called Holtzclaw machine. as contrasted with this Hodge machine, or these two exhibits 1 and 15, with the flexible cuffs attached, or do you still make and sell that Hodge-type cleaner? A. It would be: made if there were calls for it. ~ , oa Spee ee eee ~ (69) Q. But when you were providing a customer who had a Hodge cleaner with flexible cuffs 19, did you put them on for him or tell him how to put them on? A. Some-_ . times I would put them on. In a few instances I did. Our a= erectors would install them, and I believe sometimes the - mill people themselves, following written instructions, would make the installation. sat Q. Did you in every instance so position those flexible cuffs that the lower outlet end was just about slightly below the upper creel board as shown in Exhibit 15? (70) A. Yes, sir. 3 ER | __.Q. And-that was so that- the flexible, cuff. would be '- extended toward the creel and the packages of roving so | as to blow air across the machine to the creel? @. Yes, - Sir, direct air under and ‘in this area here. Under this creel board here and up on this:side. __, Q. And those flexible cuffs extended toward the ma- - chine by reason of that curved-in lower end? A. Yes, sir. . _. This curved end.extended in toward the machine. Q: And because it did curve inwardly towards the machine, it wastable to direct the currents of air against - _ the machine and blow the lint off the packages of roving ~ and the two creel boards? A. If it was directed in this area, the top tapers of the roving and the under-side . a the creel board. of cees 3 Catag -Q. And that was standard procedure, wasn’t it? A: . At that time. ? ee a 6° £3 s mn 28a | = William B. Grainger, Cross Examination (72) Q. I see. About the time you began to sell that ‘device in Exhibit 4, did you let up on the sale or promo- tion of the flexible cuffs 19 we have been talking about? ’ Flexible cuffs 19 of Exhibit 15, we will say? A. Yes, sir. -The.demand was greater for this Holtzclaw cleaner here - than for the "Hodge cleaner to which the (73) Holtzclaw development was attached, because this produced so ) much . more in cleaning. Q. How long after Exhibit 4 was put on the market did plaintiff come out with Exhibit 14? That is the one there. A. I couldn’t say just how long it was. The best I can recall, it wasn’t very long. , Q. Do you continue to sell both of them now, or have you just let up on the sale of those cleaners of Exhibit 4? . _A. If this would better fit a need; this would be'used. This one works a little better than this. Therefore, this is used in some installations. Q.: The device of Exhibit 14-you have just said works better than the one of Exhibit 4? A. Yes, sir. ' - 2 . 7 (77) Mr.- Watts: First, I will - the one to mark ” the tag as Defendant’s Exhibit B. (Defendant’ s Exhibit B is- ‘marked for identif- ™ cation.) . a Mr. ‘Watts: I will attach this to > thé: apparatus. Q.° (By Mr. Watts) Now, Mr. Grainger, would you . use that red pencil and apply to this Exhibit B reference » numerals such as we have been ‘putting on. the photo- graph. exhibits? Use the numeral] 12 to indicate the. fan easing. A: (Witness marks Exhibit B. ) Q. And the numerals 14 and 15 to indicate the rigid 4 _ outlets leading downwardly from that casing. ' (Witness marks: the exhibit.) | | ee Cee oe ee oe (78) Q. Now, let me see if you-have ever seen a de vice such as thig Exhibit B? A. This is Exhibit B? William B. Grainger, Cross Examination 29a (79) Q. That’s right. A° Yes, sir, JI have seen this with the flexible sleeve attached Q. Without the flexible sleeves and with the two rigid sections=18 at the end of each outlet conduit, you would have exactly what you have in Exhibit 1, would, you not? A. Yes, sir. That’s right, with these—with _ another one of these here on either’ side it would be the | same as this thing over here. Q. And by “these” you mean the rigid sections 18? A. The — sections, yes, sir. oe ae ee _ Q. Now, assume. you. went to that customer and sold. him on the idea of using the flexible cuffs and sold him some of the cuffs. 80) A. Yes, sir. ' .Q. Then one of these rigid sections 18 on each side would be removed and the section 18A would replace it, and to 18A in each instance you would. attach a flexible cuff. A. Yes, sir. Q.. And that is what - you did do for a period of time -until-the demand fell off because of your making these devices of Exhibits 4 and 14?-A. Yes, sir. . ' _° Q. And in each instance-the flexible cuff was a tubu- ~ lar, thin, hollow, tubular article open at each end and . turned inwardly at the lower end so that the air would go across the machine and remove lint from the creel? A. Xe, sir. . . * Se aoe eee _ (95) Mr. Watts: Just before we close, if your Honor’ . please, let me show once more the difference, if any, be- tween the regular Hodge cleaner of Exhibit 1, and the Holtzclaw cleaner of Exhibit ae ae Q. (By Mr. Watts) The only, difference; as I get it, is that in Exhibit 1 you have two rigid sections at the lower end of each outlet conduit? A. Yes, sir. 7 | (96) & And in Exhibit B here; you have the same , . Hodge cleaner but with two flexible—that is, partly flexible’ and partly rigid sections—instead of four rigid sections? A. Yes, sir. | ” 30a | William B. Grainger, Re-Direct Examination | Q. So you take off two'of the rigid sections 18 in the | Hodge cleaner.—With the four rigid sections on, it's ‘a Hodge cleaner? ‘A. Yes, sir.. Q. You take off two 6f'them and put on the flexible - cuffs and it becomes the cleaner of the patent in: ‘suit? A. I’m not that familiar'with the patent in suit. If you.added | - the Holtzclaw flexible sleeve to the Hodge cleaner— -Q.. So-that, in a word, without the flexible cuff it isn’t the patent in suit; and with.them, it is? A. Yes, sir, if it has the four 18’s as ‘designated 18—rigid metal outlets. | * . 18 * * _Re-Dmect ExaMINATION BY Mr. .GRIER. Q. I believe you testified that the horse power of the ‘motor in the Plaintiff’s Exhibits 4 and 14 was increased over the horse power motor in the Hodge cleaner? A. Yes, sir. . (97).Q. What was the purpose of increasing the hens power of the moter? A. Since there were so many more . outlets provided to clean more places on the spinning frame and do a more-effective job, greater air was needed, a larger amount of air was: needed so that required a larger power plant, or motor. ~ . Q. Do you know, as between: the Hodge cleaner and » _ these cleaners indicated as Exhibits 4 and 14, whether - there were any changes made in the fan structure? A. ~ Yes, sir, there was some difference made in the fah struc ture. Q. What was , the purpose of the changes made there? A. ee | ee eee That’s what we save on it; because this type cleaner prac- tically does a complete job of cleaning. . Q. But the basis for your comparison was Kand labor? A. Not altogether, you see— | Q. What did you use as your basis? A. ‘We wed as ¥ basis because we could use the machine. Q. As compared with what? . A. Of course, hand. It. ~. was hand after that— Q. Hand operated? AL Yes. i ier * 8 a Se ei ne floats iinaiiaiie ai at tntenteks haif of the Plaintiff, ee ey eee was examined and testified as follows: — * (137) Cross Examination By Ma. Warts. Q. Mr. Whitener, I am a little confused about this " so-called Hodge type cleaner you were talking about. Is it the apparetus thet is chown by Exhibit 17 A. Yes, | think so. 7 . (438) Q. That's what pos gve-Been having in wisi heh ue NEES Sie Saw sat Se eee pen ee _. tained with the Hodge type cleaner? A. Yes. | ‘Q. Here is Exhibit 15. Is that-what you call the Holtz. claw type? Or did you call it? A. I don’t think I called it. We have had that type of equipment like this here. es Q. And is it true that this week we obtained from your plant this Exhibit B? A. Yes. st Q. And it was in the scrap heap at that time? A. Yes, itwas. - Q. Now, have you dlls fepieen Gat would dow te - saving in cleaning time which was made by the apparatus of Exhibit 15 over the apparatus of Bubibit' 1? A. ‘tne x opposed to this? Q. That's right. A. 5 dan't tiene cui o fgese, tn, sir. Q. Was there a noticeable difference in labor, clean- — ing labor, when you went from the cleaner of Exhibit 1 to the flexible nozzle cleaner of Exhibit 15 and Exhibit B’ ’ A. On this particular picture I don’t think there is‘a great deal, but the one we have now, there is a great deal. . ~ Q. Let's stick to these two: Exhibits 1 and 15. As ! (139). get your testimony, there was no appreciable dif: ference in saving in cleaning time between those two cleaners? A. I don’t. have any figures on that. Q. It has been testified that with the flexible cuffs of Exhibit 15 and Exhibit B, a little better cleaning was ob- tained between the middle and the top creel boards. Was - your experience? A. I think so, yes, sir ; Se eg: inmate ee - QQ Was it also your experience that there was more lint accumulation between the middle creel board and the - bottom creel board when the flexible cuffs of that exhibit were used? A. Was there more accumulation in the middle than-in the top? . -Q. That’s right? A. I would think so. -Q. You are sure of it, aren’t you? A. Yes, sir. . are i a oe ete ls temeenatten ty ti Grier was between the cleaner of Exhibit 1, the Hodge- _type; and the cleaner of Exhibit 14.. Is that correct? A. _ Labor saving? . - QQ Yes. A. ‘That's right. Thig is the one we saved the ’ labor with. Q. Yes. Exhibit 14: (140) A. Yes. : -Q.,When you put in the cleaner of Exhibit 14, did "you discard the cleaner of Exhibit 15? A. Some.of these, as I remember ‘it, were reworked. I don’t. know if you ‘ want to call it the housing or the hood or the distributor .part, was changed to take care-of the outlets underneath. _ Q.. In other words, you— A. We used the motor part ae , Ropert C. Sessions, called as a witness by ‘and on behalf of the Defendant, being first duly sworn, was examined and testified as follows: é : . Direct Examination sy Mr. Warts. Q. Mr. Sessions; state your full name, age and resi- dence. A. Robert C. Sessions. I am 58 years old and live in Lakewood, Ohio. See ig Ste Q. What is ger occupation? A. I am a consulting mechanical and electrical engineer, and-I also do part- time work for the National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics. ae dee eee “a Q. Are you a registered Engineer and certified to practice as such in the State of Ohio? A. Yes, I am a SR ee ee __° _Q. Will you state what qualifications you have in suip- ‘port of your testimony.before the Court here?. That is, rt what qualifications have you that make your testimony of — _ assistance to the Court? (194) A. I studied engineering and graduated with a Bachelor of Science degree from the ' Worcester Polytechnic Institute in 1919. The next year, _ " Thad-a fellowship to continue my studies. in Swéden; and _ Since that time, I have been practically continuously -en- ' gaged in matters pertaining to-mechanical and electrical processes. I am familiar with the problems relating to the handling of air. I am familiar with the various types of cleaning apparatus: I have, on several occasions, a good ‘Many occasions, testified in engineering matters in patent litigation. in the Federal Courts. I have bsen called upon ‘o analyze and interpret patents, both in connection with | : 2 Oa | eae ee Robert C: Sessions, Direct Examination | my’ priet prsstice and in connection with my ether enigley- | _ ments during the course.of the past thirty years or more. | Tam a member of the American ‘ of Mechanical The Court: I imagine he has laid out his qualifications . sufficiently to be found by the Court as an expert, 801 make such finding. | Mr. Watts: “May I ask just one more question? The Court: Yes, sir. Q. Have you had occasion to examine or to observ — A. Yes, I have. e @ ¢' @ 8 7 : (195) Q...Will you describe the structure, mode of _ operation and results of the device which I will ask the | - ‘Clerk to mark aad identification as Defendant’s- Exhibit BS ee : (Defendant s Exhibit F is marked for identifi- - gation.) | A. Ths eguisaaten'et Dekentiiits Salinia Scud ‘ing unit -made by the American Monorail Company. It uses a rotary blower to provide a source of air under pressure. The unit itself is not\power-driven. The motor ‘of this unit does not drive the unit along the track. It is pulled along as a trailer by another power-driven unit, ‘power-driven unit being one of these Tri-rail, so- in, Ni Cee te SS ee Ser . ow poe» a } ' The Wi gy ee a motor that is en, ‘Sh ants 2 aihanh os ' part of the. ine. The unit is carried on a trackway, (196) which , of three tracks. The air is forced out | . gidewise, laterally. and then downwardly, through — these black ducts or. , to holes in the side of the tube. bemeniiUeie Cait \ ef x + pera AE EY Re OO - above the ring rail, and the other holes are located at points _ from there on down, to be atranged forthe purpose of - "directing air toward the ing rail section and the. under- - frame area of the machine, These ducts, which are square—about five inches quare. I have a cut-away piece of one of them which’ I will refer to. This piece has had ' "some newspaper stuffed in it to hold it open, but the con- struction may be seen. Rach obje, in the front and back — | directions, besides— . Js @ Ts tas th direction of travel? A. lin the direction of travel ofthe machine, have pockets in them extending through the entire length, and in those pockets are placed © _-fiber-board stays, which are, of course, stiff and rigid in of the spinning frame. = one direction but which will bend in the other direction. As the result of that construction, these ducts or tubes are _ held fairly rigidly from movement toward and away from the spinning frame but can yield in the direction length- wise of the spinning frame or parallel to the movement of of synthetic material, are me ‘travel. When yielding in that manner, (197) they can also - twist some to one side, but they, when not being bent or. twisted in normal operation, that is to say, when they are not striking an obstruction of any sort, they will tend. to . bend, they are rigid ‘and firm in the direction transversely | of the machine. They resist movement toward or away from the frame. | | Q ‘Let me interrupt just a moment. ee Mr. Watts: Would the Clerk please mark this portion 2 of the tube as Defendant’s Exhibit “G” and let the record | “show that that exhibit includes the two fiber stays which fit in the pockets of that exhibit. a aan (Defendant's Exhibit G for ‘identification ‘is marked.) - Q. You may proceed. A. baited 2 caabinned, but I am not sure, so I will say it again in any event: There is on each side of this unit a single square outlet duct made of * a Se Senn So ae thepe bp 0 cine dost made of * em a eae ss Robert C. Sessions, Direct Examination a plastic mie, That duct, of course, also includes the fiber stays, stiffening stays. Q. Would you discuss the operation and results of of 7 (198), spinning “ama -. Q. Now, does It-— The air issuing from toward the machine as well ‘as— Q. Vertically, of about thirty eee At an an- gle of about thirty degrees to the horizontal ‘angle. Be: "’ ‘tween thirty-five and forty degrees to the horizontah, - Q And from the metal part, the casing, down the - first hole the stream of air is going vertically downward? | on A. Yes, that’s right: Q. And these tubes are substantially vertical? A. That’s right. . Q. And when the air comes to the first hole: it tends to continue on-down and towards, ithe machine? A. “Yes, it goes toward the machine and downwardly. : --Q:-What is the direction of the air at the next. lower | hole? A. That air also—of course, that is a wider nozzle, so it’s a wider stream of air—but it also is moving down- - wardly as well as toward the machine when it passes out of (199) that hole, when it passes out of that. hole. om Q. Did you notice whether or not there ‘was any * cleaning of the upper creel board _ ter this apparatus? A. In my,opinion there isn @pleaning, and I didn’t notice p any —". cleaning of the uppe ppes cree board at apply to the jpackeges of roving _ -hanging from the upper creel board? A. Yes. | Q. And does. Q. What about the middle creel board and the pack- aces of roving hanging from that? A. The same comment: ° ; would apply to that. | } ° P : 40> tenn, ° e- you observed the direction of - Bee air currents issuing from Cong tegen tim the tuibes, flexible tubes? AS Y those holes moves slightly dowatardly. Actually, at about . an angle of—from the top holes the air moves down at an | angle of. between thirty.and forty degrees, downwardly . Robert C. Sessions, Direct Examination : - @a_ : Q. Where does most of the air issuing from the top-. most hole in that vertical pipe strike the machine or the spinning frame? A. It strikes the machine—I think the center of the blast of air strikes the machine about at the _ little rings on each side. . Q. Thread guides? A. The thread guides, yes. Q. About here? A. Yes. a Where does it go then? A. Then it spreads out sae and enters the machine. Q: Are you familiar with the patent in suit? A. Yes. (200) Q. You have henel its structure and operation - " and:results described? A. Yes. Q. (Continuing)—In the testimony here? A. I'am not sure I have heard very much, but I mean, I have heard the testimony here. To whatever extent that has been described, I have heard that, yes. Q. Will you describe that with respect to the struc- ture, operation and results: of the device shown and de- ~sseribed in that patent? A. This Holtzclaw patent in suit No. 2,524,797 is described as being a machine of the Hodge . type. The patent to Holtzclaw, in the first column at line tm? explains that “Typical traveling cleaning mechanism and the arrangement thereof of the character above de- | geribed are disclosed in the following patents. granted to William B. Hodge, Nos. 2,047,558 July 14, 1936, 2,128,207 - August 23, 1938, and 2,184,880. December 26, 1939, and. therefore need not be illustrated and described in detail as the present invention relates only. to improvements in the mechanism for directing the blasts of air delivered by the fan,” In other words,, this is a traveling denn such as -is shown in the Hodge: patents mentioned there, and I. have compared the drawings of this Holtzclaw patent with . those Hodge patents and find that the fan. structure shown is (201). substantially identically the same as is shown i im some detail in the Hodge Patent 2,184,880. It-is also generally the same, but not’ quite as closely the same, to the — Patent No. 2,047,558. : go Mt oe Robert C. Sessions, Direct Examination The inventor Holteclaw here continues his explana- - tion and tells how the Hodge cleaners described in patents he has just mentioned and which he says.are the same as. his invention here, his cleaner here, except for the im- provement mentioned, there: have two adjustable sleeves or nozzles at the end of each air conduit which extends from the fan casing. In other words; your Honor will remember the photo- graphs you - -have seen previously of the Hodge cleaner which showed a fan casing and outlet conduits substan- = tially the same or the same as shown in this Defendant'’s Exhibit B, in which the outlet conduit on each side is, as Holtzclaw explains here, provided with two adjustable . _ outlets. In other words, there are two outlets on the side, and that’s what Holtzclaw i is describing -here in the part of his patent I have just referred to. And he continues’ and says—this is about line 49 of column 1, starting: at line 47. (Reading) “* * * one of which directs the blast of air downwardly upon the side of the machine therebeneath and the other of which directs the blast of air transversely across the machine.” * * * * * (202) The Witness: And he continues to explain how these prior Hodge machines operated by explaining that because the nozzle terminates above the top of the ma- chine it’s “ineffective in satisfactorily preventing deposi- tion or’accumulation of lint and ‘the like upon rigid parts of the. machines ‘not located in the direct paths of the blasts of air, or upon mechanism for the material being treated located closely therebeneath.” And then he points out that the particular problem was the cleaning of the lower face of the creel board. That's at lines 6 and.7 of column 2. Mr. Grier: Where do you find the word “particular”? The Witness: I don’t find that. (Reading) ‘“* * *.and upon the spools of roving located closely therebeneath * * *” He makes his particular reference to that. Perhaps | that’s a more. exact statement. Robert C. Sessions, Direct Examination p "50 Now, in this connection, I ‘iuiel like to iin next | to column three on the next page, and here the construc- ~ tion of this Holtzclaw patent is described, as far as the outlet conduits and the mechanism for directing the air _ is concerned. This starts at line 22, and in the paragraph beginning at (203) line 22, he explains that: (Reading) . “Each of the conduits 14 and 15 has preferably adjustably - secured * * #.” _ T'think. if I could have one of these enlarged charts © we have here, I could refer to it more carefully.: (A chart is here provided for the witness.) . _ This is an enlarged photograph of figures 1 and: 2 of the Holtzclaw pavent in suit, and:I have colored parts of those enlargements to more clearly bring out and make apparent, the various parts of the machine which I want _ to refer to particularly. So the point I am referring to here states that: (Reading) “Each of the conduits 14 and 15: * * *” Those are the two-side legs or branches which come dawn from the center fan section or fan ee. The Court: That is the light blue? - The Witness: That is in light blue, yes. (Reading) . “** * has preferably adjustably secured to its lower end a downwardly extending sleeve or nozzle 18 * * *” and that is the so-Called rigid sleeve or nozzle, colored in red here on the chart. (Reading): ‘“* * * for directing the blast of air therefrom downwardly upon the side of the machine therebeneath * * *.” Your Honor will see downwardly ex- tending lines with arrows on them showing the general » direction of the.air from those two nozzles 18. There is one of those.on each side of the machine. The one on the right-hand side in these two figures is behind the flexible nozzle 19, so only (204) a tiny portion of it shows here. You see that part of it colored red there. That is the end of the nozzle 18 on ‘the right-hand side; so there is one , : downwardly directed rigid nozzle or oa section on‘ each side. And the ee Ta contiaiue. (Reading): ‘‘* * * and also a downwardly extending sleeve or nozzle 19 for directing a-current oe air ‘transversely across the machine.”’ a geo | + Robert C. Sessions, Direct Examination - On each side there is also a flexible outlet section attached . to what are called outlet conduits 14 and 15, and the flexible section I have colored in purple. . And the patent shows arrows showing the direction of air currents coming from those flexible nozzles and how ie —— directed transversely across the machine so that it hits the top of the upper spools of roving and will ‘flow under the upper creel board: - The patent continues. “In the ee invention either or both of the’nozzles may be of highly flexible material - adapted to yield upon impingement of an obstruction in the path of travel of the nozzles. Preferably the nozzles _ 18'of the machine are of rigid material and terminate at | such height as not to engage an obstruction such as an operator passing through the aisle between groups of ma- _ chines. The nozzle 19, which conducts. the blast of air transversely of the machines, is of highly flexible mate- "rial * * al 99 _ (205) I might stop here just a moment to explain that ’ this patent mentions the use of “highly flexible material” in several places.. The degree of flexibility is not explained in. the patent, and it seems likely that to determine the proper flexibility experimentation would be needed be cause of the rather indefinite statement as to: what i is or is not highly flexible material, see Q. Is that term “highly flexible material,” or is that - element so described,.an essential one in the combination? A. It is the same element that is carried forward in Claim — 6 of the suit. ete. . Q. No, I mean, structurally isn’t that the heart of the— A. Oh, yes, that’ s the sole change from the ye Hodge patent. - — | - Q: And it is described only by the term “highly ! - flexible’? A. That's right. _ Q. Does:the patent also say what ssitiaiel might be used? Does it say anything about the material? A.. Yes, it does. Q. What? A. It states es that the—Before I come to that, I might continue the sentence I am on. — "Robert C. Sessions, Direct Examination a Q..Go right ahead. A. And.I will continue the por- tion I was reading, which begins on line 44, column. 3. (Reading) :*“* * * and extends (206) well below the end of the nozzle 18 and is provided with an inwardly curved ' and preferably tapering end portion *.* *.” Your Honor can see the portion cqlored purple on the chart how this end portion tapers to become slightly smaller at its outlet end and is also curved inwardly to direct the air inwardly across the machine at that level. (Continuing to read): ‘“* * * which is sastthanait at such predetermined - height as to direct the air inwardly neneam the creel board * * = ”? Now, I want to. call particular attention to that, be- cause in the patent drawings—and I refer now to figure l-of the patent drawings—two of the creel boards are numbered. The upper creel board is numbered 4, and the patent calls the creel board which we here in this case have been calling the middle jcreel board, the patent calls it the lower creel board; but in any event,a different numeral is applied to that middle creel board. It is marked 3. So that at this point in the patent he is explaining that the inwardly curved flexible nozzle 19 on each. side is lo- _ cated beneath the creel board 4, i.e., beneath the upper creel board. (Continuing to read): “* * * thereby to prevent accumulation of lint upon the under face of the creel board or upon the spool of roving 5 and the strand 20 * * *.”- Strand 20 is the strand leading from the upper spools (207) of roving. It’s marked here on figure 1 of the patent. . ; Now, regarding the material of the cuff 19, the highly flexible cuff, paragraph starting at line 36 states: , (Baed- ing): : “Preferably the sleeve or nozzle 19 comprises a cuff of suitable woven fabric which desirably is impregnated with suitable material to make it impervious to the blast of air passing therethrough and is provided with means for retaining it in expanded condition.” ; | : . ar Weasels Robert C. Sessions, Direct Examination . Now, the material mentioned there seems to be gen- erally the material which seems. to comply or seems to agree with or corresponds to the material which was used on this Holtzclaw device, which is defendant’s Exhibit B. Q. Does the patent describe any particular material ‘except to say that it’s “woven fabric”? A. No, it doesn't describe any particular material, and it does not describe or does not tell how flexible or how stiff that material should be. The different fabrics and the different manners of impregnating would well result in different degrees. of flexibility. — Q. The patent refers'to suitably impregnated mate. rial. Does it name any? A. No, it does not name any. | Q. Are these two things, i.e., the fabric and the im- pregnated material—are they essential to the apparatus (208) of the patent in suit? A. Yes, they are the only thing there is that differs from the Hodge device, if there is any difference, as the inventor himself states in column. 1 of his patent: His invention relates only to the improye- _ ments in the mechanism for directing the blasts of air delivered to the frame, and the only change that he has . made in that respect over the Hodge device was to change one of the rigid outlet nozzles on each side and attach to — it a short flexible cuff having an inwardly turned lower end. ~ Q Could ent sendinig tho patent tn wait Gutermine | without experimentation the flexibility, the necessary | flexibility, or the proper fabric to use in constructing it, or the proper impregnating material to use? A. No,-not in - my opinion: I think it will take trial and experimentaticn. Q. That would be as to each one of those three fee ‘tures? A. Yes. Certainly to secure a combination which would be satisfactory would require more information or | more knowledge than is available or is given in the patent _ _ . itself. . Q Did you describe‘how this apparatus of the patent . in suit was actuated? A. No, I think perhaps I did not de scribe that. This is the same as several prior patents, going at least back to a Walker patent; and the Holtzclaw . cn - [ / J - Q Have you considered and discussed Hodge patent No. 2,184,880, which, I believe, has been marked De- fendant’s Exhibit A? . \ ; a oS oe ee (210) Q. Have you described that patent as to the * structure, moue of operation and results; and in doing so, .perhaps you can compare it with the apparatus of the _ patent in suit which you have just described. A. This is Hodge Patent 2,184,880, and figure 2 of it has been repro- | . duced on a large scale by a photographic process on the | upper right-hand corner of the chart which I have been | referring to in connection with the Holtzclaw patent.. - Q Let's mark that chart now. © . The Court: Is that the same as Hodge 15? Mr.‘Watts;/ Yes, your Honor. Let us mark that large chart as Defendant’s Exhibit H. Ae (Defendant's Exhibit No. H is marked for identifi- cation. ) The Witness: Your Honor, I might, just to clarify eet, dian eee See Gencbuee ee ee . Robert C. ‘fae tintam aowe St mote a Gn ee | cuff was installed. =.—sai= } . The Court: That is the blue-part?. The Court: In other words, snakes: tn teat Ws . the December 26, 1939, Hodge patent is similar to the © earlier model except it has extended hard cuffs. Is that right? The part which you represent by the red? ‘The Witness: No. I am afraid I haven't made myself quite clear yet, your Honor. Maybe this is a better way of saying what the point I am trying to make is: That is, that this machine of the Hodge patent 2,184,880, which is * prior art to the patent in suit— - The Court: Yes. The Witness: lis tonite tens sae techies, Op (212) patent in suit. That’s an expired patent. . -, The Court: But followed the Hodge No. 1. | _ The. Witness: Followed some of the earlier Hodge de- velopments; that’s right. And this patent showed the con- struction in its entirety, which was the identical structure shown here to make Defendant’s Exhibit B; and to make Defendant’s Exhibit B, one of the rigid noasles or rigid outlet sections: was. removed, and the flexible cuff was applied on each side. So we have referred to that pata itself. | ee : I think a side view may make it a little more clear. If you will look at figure 1 on the first sheet of the draw- _ ing, your Honor, up in the middle, this is a much smaller scale. There is a side view of this entire unit, and extend- the other, two of these outlets 118. So that would be a Looking at Defendant’s Exhibit B, side view; with two . _ outlet nozzles on that side, and there are two outlet noz- * gles on the other side.. Now, the view of figure two, which has been repro- uced on this chart H, has the end view. It’s the same as - the exhibit as I -have turned it now. You can see the fan casing at the top, in which there is a fan like the fan 3; . the motor portion was not brought into it. The two outlet (213) conduits. on each side, extending down and slightly laterally, spread out slightly—not very much And then “at the bottom side there is in this view, one sees one of - the rigid outlets or nozzles on the left side and another one on the right-hand side. — : | ' . . Those rigid sections or nozzles at the bottom end of these ducts‘are.in the Hodge patent 880, are made adjusta- ble so that they may be moved toward or from the center of the machine to. direet the air both downwardly and This particular Hodge patent made no attempt to claim anything regarding the air duct structure. In other. words, this was not the—The invention involved here was the detail of stopping the blasts of air at certain points . along the machine; in other words, he showed a cleaner, | . but the invention claimed in this Hodge patent related to the means of starting and stopping the fan, to stop the blasts of air When it passed over certain parts of the spin- ning frame or over the aisles. That, of course, is not a - Matter of any importance and means nothing here in this Suit. | | oi So I refer now to the left-hand side of the chart of Exhibit H,and your Honor can see how closely similar . and how, exactly the. same effect the device shown by it does refer to the use of flexible material. On page 3 your Honor. There is a 3 up in the first column of that page starting at line 31. First, I say in line 32 there is a word “provided,” which, in the specification as originally ‘filed and has been certified to by the Patent Office was and should have been “pivoted” instead of the word “pro — vided.” So, with that in mind, the sentence here reads: “Although these spouts aré not pivoted they are made of (216) Q. Tell the Court what is shown on the other part of the chart. A..In the center of the chart, Defend- — ant’s Exhibit H, Claim 6 of the Holteclaw patent in suit - into paragraphs or.elements in an. attempt to more clearly | show the features involved, the elements involved in the _ / Robert C. Sessions, Direct Examination - ‘58a structure which is defined by the claim—to show that _ consists of a single motor which-drives both the fan and propels the carriage, and the claim so specifies that there - _ is a (218) motor and means operable by said motor for propelling the carriage and for rotating said fan. - | - The next element of the claim is (reading): “A fan | casing enclosing the fan having an inlet and oppositely — positioned outlet conduits, * * *.” The fan casing is colored - in brown. It is marked 12 on the drawings of the patent e in suit. The inlet is yellow. It’s marked 13 on the draw- - _ings of the patent in suit. The oppositely positioned outlet | conduits are blue, and they are numbered 14 and 15 on the é Then we to’ more or less of a major division in claim where one might say that the part of the claim to this point describes and defines the machine itself operators standing,” finds its (219) precedent in the language of the patent specifica- tions. I will refer to column 3 of the patent in suit, starting at line 37, which reads (reading) (Plaintiff's Ex. 12): . “Preferably the nozzles 18 of the machine are of _Tigid material and terminate at such height—" The Court: Where is that, now?. - | . The Witness: It’s on the second page. The column it headed by the numeral 3. | The Court: Yes, I see it. é The Witness: (Continuing to read): “e © © 18 of the machine are of rigid material and terminate at such height the machine operator is the nozzle 18, and I have shown Cat es Sa eh ie A ERNE OE oh So Gree oe Oe patent. : ef | The next element of the claim reads: “* * * and in which the said conduits at_ each side are provided with a - Now, I itis iis th didicnate dui teatte ed flexible member 19, in some places the nozzle and fill fd ie aeee at Th + if 8 eB ‘ i ifs ; Mr. Watts: {ask the Clerk to, mark that definition a ' Defendant’s Exhibit J. (Defendant's Exhibit J is marked.) | oe oe ee . (221) The Witness: 1 think in this défizition the No. 5. definition will probably adhere, because it is (reading): “Mech.” This is an abbreviation for mechanism or tnechanical, and -it reads: “Something resembling, or likened. to a cuff for the wrist.” : , Now this description or definition of the “quff” in the claim says that it.is both of highly flexible material, as the specifications of the patent stated, and it says that it ex- —~ > tends therefrom toward the machines. That means. it ex- directed toward the center of the spinning frames, towards ey ree Seemann Sie epee Sew af Apacs: of — Me _ Then, tis decrptive portion ofthe or more or less functional statement is added which reads, (reading): “*.* ® to enable currents of air produced by the fan and — aonerant, Graeals Ho outa to bn Senet sates Go: machines * * *” There again the teaching of the that this air is directed acrogs, against and across the - of- roving between the upper and middle creel marked 3 and 4. (Continuing to read): “0? ond the cuffs to yield upon impingement with an operator or other. obstruction in their path of travel.” - I think I might again refer at this time to this actual structure, Defendant's Exhibit B, and call your Honor's attention to the fact that it is, s0 far as the parts which are here are concerned, this is an exact replica, a substantially — exact_replica, of the structure shown in the drawings of the patent ‘in suit; and we have supported this Exhibit B on top of the tri-rail or track, which is part of Defendant's . Exhibit F, in a position so that the outlet of the flexible cuffs is located at the same height as was taught by the q _ Is there any teaching in the patent as to any other ro] tion for these highly flexible cuffs? A. No, there is no 8, 48 sponds fully to all the requirements of Claim 6? A. This _ apparatus of the Hodge patent 2,184,880 responds fully to the requirements of Claim 6, except for the limitation that - the’ cuff is made of highly flexible material. I might point vut here that if a few words were removed from Claim 6, these words “of highly flexible material,” which are under- lined in purple on the chart, Exhibit H, and the words, “The cuffs to yield upon impingement with an operator or ' the drawing of Hodge patent No. 2,184,880, and state whether or not that apparatus re . \ \ other obstruction in their path of travel.” If those words _ tobert C. Senalans, Direct Examination | ce ee were removed, these five words stating that the cuff is of highly flexible material and the last two lines of the claim ‘as reproduced on the chart, Exhibit H, “the cuffs to yield | upon impingement with an operator or (224) other ob- . struction in their path of travel.” If those words are . - stricken out from the claim, the claim. reads exactly on this. - Hodge patent 2,184,880, and it reads exéctly.on some of the | ‘other Hodge. patents and other prior wat patents —_ than Hodge. in é Q. Is this Hodge patent 2,184,880: ‘acknowledged in the Holtzclaw patent? A. Yes, it is. And | other Hodge patents. I might at this time point out that there are two red lead lines on the right-hand side of the chart H leading \. to the rigid section of the nozzle which is shown in the \\ Hodge paterit 2,184,880; and I have also nded a red , ee ‘cuff” to the rigid Hodge patent 880. - \It might be pertinent here to call attention to the fact that in the Hodge patent 2,047,558 on the chart here and sheet l\of that patent is enlarged and reproduced, is an enlargement on this chart which I now have; and I merely — "~—want-at this time to-call attention to the fact that the specifications of this Hodge patent 2,047,558, call the ad- justable nozzles which he provides “sleeves or cuffs.” The use of this word “cuff” as describing a ‘short rigid non- flexible outlet or \nozzle, was old and: used previously in this Hodge patent. That word appears in the Hodge patent 558 at page 1, column 1), line 49. ‘-Q. Is it true that the cuff itself is shown in. the (225) figure 5? A. In. this earlier Hodge patent, as in the 880 Hodge patent, there are two sleeves or cuffs on each side of the machine which are described as being two sections | which are attached to the, in this case, relatively short outlet ducts 14 and 15 which lead from the fan housing 11. -Q. Without going into detail in Hodge Patent 2,047,558, will you state whether or not the claim in suit reads squarely on that showing, except for,the limitations — of the flexible cuff? A. It does. read squarely on the show- ing of the Hodge patent, with that exception. Sie: 118 of this i, alll ee Fe een Roliert C. Sessions, Direet Examination -Q. fhe hint op ndgueds Chine: it reads alike on each . ~ of these two Hodge pa tents? A: Yes. | Q. And fails to > teed only in respect ‘to the flexible 2 _ cuff?’ A. That's right. ~ Mr. Watts: I ask that the exhibit just desctibed - . the witness be marked as_Deferndant’s Exhibit.K. That is’ a showing of certain figures of Hodge aes 2,047,558. The Court: That isK? Mr. Watts: Yes, your Honor. . \ m6 » (Defendat’ s Exhibit K is marked.) - | im suit,(226) were they? A. Yes. “Q. Now, does the fact’ that'a certain part af that claim te in suit does not find a respons’’.in either of those Hodge _ patents mark the only difference between, those prior pat- ents and the one in suit? A. Yes. Q. So-that any alleged infringement ‘ii in the patent in suit, niust. be found: to reside solely in that flexible cuff limitation? A. Yes. ) | 3 ee ee ee oe .? (21) Q. Now, would you take up the tees at the ‘bottom: of Exhibit H. A. Here at the bottom of Exhibit H : there has been reproduced parts of the drawings of three Frau art patents: the Robinson patent No. 1,326,140; the Trautvetter_patent No. 2 309, 362; and the Lantern patent No. 2,137,9 | Geie nt Wrident lnk de eee flexible outlete’ or noszles which would yield upon im” pingement Eh GER Se. eevee Oe Cage path of travel, —. ok! "Mr. Watts: ‘We havea he chart showing n more than - one vow of tuto them Gate botents.. I will ask the Clerk to mark that as Defendant's Exhibit L. (Defendant's Exhibit L is marked.) Q. (By Mr. Watts) “Would you discuss each of those | three patents. in connection with Exhibit L? Before you Robert C. Sessions, Direct Examination Farge Sta start, I might hand up to the Court a volume of prior art (228) patents which I will ask the Clerk to mark as De- fendant’s Exhibit M. (Detendant s Exhibit M is marked. ) * * * * * The Witness: These three patents are merely three of ’ ~a number of possible evidences of the common use of flexible portions when one wished to either direct a blast of air or digect a flow of material at a certain point and at - the same time avoid injury to a person, or to yield easily when an obstacle is presented, or when there is an . obstruction in the path of travel. - ; This first, the Robinson patent, for example, relates to the use of flexihle nozzles at the end of the tubes or ducts . _which supply sand beneath the wheels of a locomotive. | _. These nozzles are directed inwardly at the point where the sand is to be applied, and they each have a flexible end marked 8'on the drawings. And the patent itself states in - (229)-several places that the nozzles are flexible to move if there is an obstruction in their path. First, in column 1 _ of the patent, starting at line 28, paragraph, ‘which reads, (reading): “Further objects of the invention are to pro- vide a sanding device which is simple in its construction and arrangement, strong, ‘durable, efficient in its use, hav- ing means to maintain it and to restore it in and to normal position in case the discharge nozzle is shifted by an ob- , Struction at or near the track, readily set up in operative position, and comparatively inexpensive.” In the second column.of page 1, at line 75, the patent states (reading): “The pipe 3, as well as the pipe 4. has attached to the lower end thereof. a flexible discharge nozzle 8, and as the construction of each nozzle is the same, -- but ¢ ‘Will be described, the description of one applying _. to tHe other. The'nozzle 8 is formed from a flexible body, __ preferably rubber, and is secured to the lower end of the delivery pipe bya clamp 8a. The lower edge of the nozzle . 8s flat.throughout and directly opposes and is positioned in very close proximity to the tread of the track rail 6, as Mm, Robert C. Sessions, Direct Examination all as in very close proximity to that. wheel of ‘the loco- motive with which the nozzle cooperates. The nozzle 8 is. disposed at an inclination’ and extends toward that wheel. with which it cooperates, * * *” 7 7 Starting in the succeeding paragraph the statement is (230) made as- follows: (reading): “The flexibility of the nozzle prevents the breakage or permanent bending there- of\when meeting with an obstruction and the spring 9 - * * *” Thht is the coil spring on the inside of the nozzle, the rubber nozzle— (Continuing-to read): “‘* * * and the spring 9, not only maintains the nozzle’8 in normal posi- tion, so as to deliver the sand at a point in close proximity . where the wheel engages with the track rail, but also re- stores the nozzle to.normal position in case the ‘nozzle is — shifted to one side when meeting with an obstruction.” _ ‘Then, referring to the Lintern patent 2,137 917: This is also a sandirig device, and in this case a sanding device for an automobile, as shown here in figure 1. And the . sand is conveyed through a relatively. rigid portion or duet 10 toa flexible outlet nozzle 11. : The Court: I do not imagine they sold many of those, did they? The Witness: I doubt it, although I have heard that | they are being used on trucks now. It is coming back into _- use again.. Maybe this man was ahead of his time. I think eee SEES SED EIS een ee ey SN ae snow. Mr. Watts: I think your Honor will find— / The Witness: This patent to Lintern also states that : the object is to provide “a flexible discharge header and (231) distribution conduit combination so arranged that striking of the conduit or any part. of ‘the combination by obstructions during movement: of. the vehicle cannot damage the header and'conduit or the remainder of the sanding apparatus.” | Now, the Trautvetter patent is also a device that’s an outlet from a toilet of a railroad car, and it's arranged with a flexible end so that the discharge will be directed in the ev desired and so that when. the truck of the car Robert C. Sessions, Direct Examination : - * la _turns, as shown in figure 2, Ce a | the end of the nozzle will not damage the nozzle or will not’ damage the truck. And it states that this nozzle is “flexible and resilient” so that it can readily be deformed | if hit by a portion of the truck in its movement. _. * And the material is described on page 2 at line 15 of column 1 as being (reading): “The flexible and resilient portion 27 is preferably made of rubber reinforced by fabric so that it normally’ retains its tubular shape,‘but is readily pushed aside or deformed as shown at 30 (Fig. 2), if the truck 20 swings sufficiently to strike its wall. After such deformation it returns to normal as shown in Fig. 3.” The Court: That is offered, I assume, for the purpose of showing that there were cuffs and things of that kind prior to this? . Mr. Watts: Yes, sir, in many different. industries. The Court: Well, we have that. (232) Mr. Watts:. And as your Honor will recall, one of the witnesses testified yesterday about piping air in a spinning veem dhseugh « motel pipe and then heiving « long hose to carry it around to the machines. * The Court: That was the Holtzclaw? | My. Watts: No, sir. That was the hand cleaner | method. Now, I offer in evidence a certified copy of the applica- tion file im the Patent Office frein which the patent in suit issued. e The Court: Holtzclaw patent? __’Mr. Watts: Yes, sir. I offer it.in evidence as Defend- ant's Exhibit N: The Court: All right, sir. ; (Defendant's Exhibit N is filed.) . Mr. Watts: And because the Norwegian patent was cited in that case, I have obtained from the Patent Office a + gertified translation of the description ‘and have also at- __ tached_photostats of the drawing.. I offer that certification - - and prints of the patent in evidence as Defendant’s Exhibit 0. | ; | cs ea. | — Robert C. Sessions, Direct. Examination "- (Defend@nt’s Exhibit O is filed.) : Q. (By Mr. Watts) Now, would you comment very __ briefly, Mr. Sessions, on the Norwegian patent—just, very: | : — —— a a fe ees (233) The Court: It is: just a matter of drawing up dust or dirt from the roud. The whole thing is exemplified in the nozzles that appear on the spouts of the drill. It is one element in processing that has been used for a long time. Mr. Watts: 1 genes Chat cnawtien the question. The Witness: Yes. This used a yielding nozzle g; ‘through which air was directed at the place to be cleaned. . This Norwegian also had a suction to pick up the dirt that is blown up by the nozzle. He had a combination of an air blast to loosen the dirt and.a suction device to— .“ The Court: That particular factor, are those all things | that have been used for a long time? : _ (234) The Witness: Yes, your Honor. | | 7 The Court: In any number of things: drills and all - sorts of spouts. — The Witness: lnniameteble uses of flexible outlets. The Court: Just as every-day as a woman's voice. Q. (By Mr. Watts)’ Now, having’ in mind the prior art as evidenced by these Hodge patents and by these other patents showing flexible nozzles, arid also having in mind the fact that the claim in suit differs from all those things solely by’ the last limitation of the flexible cuff, highly *. flexible cuff, state whether or not in your opinion anything of an inventive character or anything more than. obvi >us- | ness or mechanical skill was required to produce the de- vice of the patent in suit? Mr: Griér: I obregt on the ground it’s leading, and on the ground it’s the ultimate. question for the Court to de- cide. The Court: He is expressing the opinior’ of an n expert. 7 which he.is entitled to do. Overruled. — A. In my opinion, it definitely involves no patentable invention. It is something that would be obvious to any- Q. Having- those same factors in mind, state whether or not the Holtzclaw.improvement pushed back the fron- tiers of chemistry or physics and the like? (235) A. No, it O did not. ? _ Q And do you think, is it your opinion that it would make any distinctive contributions to scientific knowledge? A. No. > oe , Re | Q. Now, much has been said about the development of this spinning frame cleaning art. Have you prepared - charts which trace that development? A. Yes. . a ae ea | Q. (By Mr. Watts) Will you discuss the development - of this- industry, or this art, by reference to those three” charts P, Q, and R, and you may pass over it relatively (236) quickly. A. These charts are arranged chronolog- ically. The left-hand inside of Exhibit P are reproductions from two Smith patents, No. 1,857,410 and No. 1,920,768. _ These yesterday were shown on photographs, and at that time they were identified as being the Walker device. The Walker patent itself preceded these two patents and had a different type of nozzle. It weuld have been more correct in discussing the photograph yesterday to call the device the device of the Smith patent. In any event, your Honor will see here in the first Smith patent a device for clean- ' ing spinning frames where there isa motor-driven blower in the center and two outlet conduits extending transverse- . ly at each side, with downwardly and inwardly curved . . Outlets, These are rigid outlets marked 86 in the patent. : Figure 14 in the lower right-hand corner of this sheet g A» of the Smith patent shows a cross section of the entire - Spinning framie with the cleaner mounted above the frame. This cleaner was arranged to travél on a track just like the modern-day cleaners de. The direction of air flow is shown by arrows in that figure 14. oe There is, also-your Honor will see in the upper middle Of the bottom portion of the lower casing 20, which directs. & machine : 2 oF strei : a ight down. It _ , was intended (— by Hodge ; : that | HI HH i] taegaps Heat yt ee £1 ; ligt Hit ui PAH cae nae ffafs 44° sl hitse ifs apy ia: tgdags thn iat fe Te qn bile Hn bi He et alate gies STH The ela] Wh an a ga ] a eiviee t ije 7 HEH HEHE rE ipeseet =s ga 4 asf HIMHIE E | GH 1 ada gift i j HHL fads Weaish bE : e535 - Laan a UF HE + i ie aigstiae | Wi ite ae i ie the He wisileta li i j THe ar 43 tage apt: Ae rT 443, baie ieee EEA : aH HTH RUTH EH TE : Lite al sqaysea? 53 ABH TMzalg] | ity } oa Hae ie thle TAP rete Ue PL F af iene Aa HH ee TLE fh atl rut st! geties Q. Now, we have reviewed. the es jie these pres- . — Jory = . e ° _Rebert C. Sessions, Uurect Examinaueou Ss wea ent-day models, and we ‘have seen the limitations ih the | _ claim of the patent in suit. I would like to know. if you _ have considered the file history of the patent in suit? A. Yes, I heve. Pag * @ And did you find that the limitations in the claim week in suit were emphasized by the specifications? Mr. Grier: Objection. __ . ‘The Court: Overruled. A. Yes,-I did. ee. e rrs the claim-in suit were put in by the solicitor after the’ citation of prior patents? A. The entire claim in suit was put in after the citation of prior patents. - 2 Q. I didn’t state the question properly. Satelite. ing (242) the file history of the paterit in suit—and I am . now thinking of the original claims as well as the speci- -fications—did you find that the claims were amended by | including additional limitations, and that they were so + amended after the examiner had cited prior art? A. Yes, _ that is true. — SUD sitsh: tte ut 0c: shite caine’ od hace Dinitn- _ tions? A. Your Honor, if I might refer to that file? No, T - ‘think T have an- abstract of it that I can use. | Q. Well, we could use the Court's copy. Hore it is. A. Mr. Grier: Sai Minnie Geet deat ean to the fact that the file, being a written i t and in evidence, speaks for itself? The Court: “Yes, it is. in evidence. He was just dis : cussing that. - y A. In this connection, 1 merely would print out that Q. I might simplify the matter by mentioning the , claims 3.to 5. A. Yes, sir. © - Mr. Grier: I obj.ct on the ground that 3 to 5 are not _ Subject to this litigation. | Mr. Watts: That’s all right, your Dine, but: they show what the eT te a en ee in — order to get his claims allowed. A. In claim 3, is ote 68a : —-- Rebert C. Sessions, Direct’ Examination . for example, the claim as originally filed was amended _ to state that the flexible: nozzle, the highly flexible nozzle . | was—No. The nozzle made of impervious fabric was curvéd, had an inwardly curved, end portion, and the | . word “curved” relating: to the end portion is also added by amendment to Claim 4. _ geek. iver - As these claims were allowed, claims 1, 2 and 6, ail > were limited to the use of flexible cuffs; and claims 3,4 — _ end 5 were limited to the use of yieldable nozzles. Claims ‘1, 3, 4 and 5.as allowed were all limited to having inward- ly curved flexible cuffs or nozzles; and claim 2 was limited to having a cuff which extended downwardly and in-: wardly. In other words, the claims were directed to the - - use of inwardly directed cuffs and a distinction was made between the terminology of claims 1, 2 and 6 and the terminology of claims 3, 4 and 5 as far as the flexibility is concerned. Claims: 3, 4 and 5 merely state that the structure has “yieldable” nozzles, whereas claims 1, 2 and ‘6, the claim in suit, were limited to. the-use of “highly ” flexible cuffs.” ES sae 9 : . ~ Q. What did you find with respect to claim'6, which, when it was presented to the examiner was No. 8? A. - Claim 6 was presented to the examiner after an interview mark or comment here that fellowes the portion I have read. which states: “The importance of this feature has /been 2 a Mowert &. Stasis, aces seneusee i emphasized throughout as noted. in lines:8 to 14 of page 4, _ anid 1 to 5 of page 8 of the specifications, which, enables _ the apparatus effectively to direct the current of air across _ the machines at a relatively low position and at the, same“ time by a flexible feature which prevents injury to the operators of the machines.” : | 0k 4 Q. In vig of those comments, 7 whether or ‘not it is your opinion that the highly flexible material limita-. tion, the inwardly curved end, and the: direction or ex- - tension of the (245) cuffs toward the machine, and the . discharge of air across the machine were important con- siderations in the allowance of that claim that is here in suit? A. Yes, they were. And I might add that in addition there I think consideration was the location of'the air stream where it was directed across the underside of the upper creel board was of importance in this respect. Em- phasized there. ee Bes - .Q. In your opinion is ‘the action and operation and results of the portion of the apparatus down to but not. including the flexible cuffs, is the operation and results - of that part of the apparatus affected by the presence-of __ _ the flexible cuffs? A. Did you say “affected”? I didn’t ; eee | _Q Would the flexible cuffs perform the same function and operation if attached to some other. type of rigid ¢on- _ if duit?’ A. Yes. | ek Pee ae a: 0a Pa eg iz Robert C. Sessions, Direct Examination 4 Ta “in the patent in suit. These ducts, as I explained yesterday. have rigid fiber pieces on each side of them, arranged so that they will not yield transversely of the machine. That, ‘of course, is important when such a long.tube is used be- cause the air leaving the duct jerks, or thrusts an out- ward: thrust, and if the duct did not have (249) that rigidity,-it would bend out, so-that your Honor. can see _thé¥yThe tri-rail cleaner has attached to it a motor-driven carriage and a separate motor which is:used to drive its _ carriage along the track; and that tri-rail cleaner pulls the ~ accused structure along the track. | : - Q. Does the accused apparatus, for example, given as Exhibit F, show a cuff extending toward the machines in the -(250) sense of the patent? A. The accused does -not,.in my opinion, have such a cuff. It dees not have : cuff, because the cuff is the word that was used and as I understand its meaning it*relates to a short section, and _ these ducts of the accused apparatus have no inwardly curved portion. They do extend downwardly, but they do ’ not extend inwardly, transversely toward the machine. 72a Be ie ee ’ Robert C. Sessions,: Direct Examination & _ Q. Are they parallel to the. sides of the machine? A. ~ _ “Yes, they are substantially parallel to the sides of the | machine. dip Q. And if they -would extend toward the machine, they would intersect it sooner ‘or later, would they not? A. I think that was the meaning of the use of the word in the patent in suit, because these ducts do extend toward the mechanism of the’ machine; whereas, these ducts of the accused structure will never, no matter how far ‘they lare’ ~ extended, intercept or contact the machine itself. ‘Mr, Grier: Excuse me. | didn’t understand that ques- tion fully. “In describing the Parks-Cramer device, did _ you refer to our r cuffs as ducts? Would you let me hear what he said? The Witness: I called—These I intended t to call cuffs. I am not sure what'I said. Mr. Grier: I thought you called them ducts. (251) A. Kither nozzles or cuffs, I think, is the proper , term. ae Q. It was necessary, was it. not, tw turn the cuffs of the patent device inwardly in order for the air which came out of the end to strike the machine and blow across it? A. Yes.: :. hy 8 : . Q What is the function of the accused trailer unit? 5 eae _ A. The accused trailer unit functions to clean the under- | frame and the lower portion of:the machine only. The > unit which pulls along thé trailer unit, the tri-rail cleaner, along, is all that is needed to cléan the portion of the frame | of the machines above the greenboard, the creel portion of t 74a : Robert. C. Sessions, Direct Examination the machine;.if one did not wish to clean the under frame portion, the trailer unit could be omitted entirely. | ~Q. Some reference was made yesterday in the plain- tiff’s case to Exhibit 14, which shows a device referred to ~as the “elephant trunk’ cleaner. Will you compare the — - apparatus-of Exhibit 14 kcal that of the Holtzclaw patent in suit? | Mr. Grier: What ¢@ you mean? The illustration. in the Holtzelaw patent or the patent? | Mr. Watts: The apparatus illustrated i in | the Holteclaw _ patent. | (255) Q. (By Mr. Watts) And point out any struc- | tural differences you may find. A. The apparatus shown on the photograph Exhibit 14 uses a plurality of ducts and nozzles, outlet discharge points, direeted. to various parts of the machine. There are two nozzles which I will mark with the numeral 1 at ‘the center directed downwardly, The air is discharged from an open end. There are two. | ‘nozzles, one on each side and one on the left-hand side. I will mark them with the numeral 2. These nozzles 2 are made of flexible material and are located in substantially ” the same position as the nozzles 19 of the Holtzclaw patent | in suit, relative ‘to the spinning frame itself and to the spools of roving and the upper creel board. Thefe are.on each side also an intermediate nozzle which I will mark 3. This nozzle 3 has an inwardly curved end and it’is posi- tioned approximately at the level of the middle creel board. It has a flexible end portion, but the upper portion ‘of this nozzle has been reinforced by a reinforcing member which .I shall mark 4. That reinforcing member resists move- ment toward and away frem the center of the machine.) ' | There is another downwardly extending duct, or tubular portion, which I shalt mark with a reference _numeral.5, which extends down below the lower creel - board and which has, I believe, three outlet openings :in it - directed toward the (256) machines. These’ outlet open- ings discharge air to clean the lower_portion-of the -ma- ~~ ‘chine and the: underframe. The machine of Exhibit 14—. ~ Robert c. Sessions, Direct Examination , | | 75a Q. Juat a moment. I see you are going to the other patent. I would like to clear up one or two things. first. ‘The long tubes 5'on Exhibit 14, are they open at the bot- tom, as the others are? A. No, as I Temember hasta are iiot open at the bottom. - aerate Q. Do they have holes in the. sides of them? A A A. Yes, that’s right. at QQ. Have you’ examined the Structure as to any of those tubes 5? A. Yes, Ihave... © | | | Q. And how are they scnatructed, the ones you saw? _ - A. This tube which I saw which ‘corresponds with the one © ~ which I marked 5 on Exhibit 14 is of thick, quite stiff ma- terial. It.will bend, but it is not in any sense of the word . highly flexible. It has a seam in the side away from the machine and inside of this vertical tube or ductthere is a. reinforcing member in ‘the form of a high-pressure hose, which does hot carry the air but which provides a stiffen- ' ing effect. to resist movement toward or away-from the machine, and it reduces the over-all — of the 8 . tube 5, sense (257) of the claim in suit? A. No, it does not. . - Q.'Is it generally parallel to the side of the machine | as in defendant’s accused apparatus? A. Yes, it is. .I ‘might add here that in one of these Parks-Cramer units which I have observed, the rigid portion to which the tube and a half inches above the floor level. It was about on ~ the same plane as the top creel board. This was at the | ‘A. M. Smyre Manufacturing Company at Gastonia, North Carolina, where I made that observation. se Q. Did you find in the—or have’ you completed your answer? A. Ihad not quite completed. ~~ °Q. Pardon me. Go ahead. A. This device in Exhibit 14 has no- rigid. nozzles extending - downwardly : toward the machine just the same as is ‘shown in the Holtzclaw © - patent in suit, although there is an opening in the upper portion of the outlet duct which discharges air near the _ Q. Does that tube 5 intl ial the machine in the | 5 was attached terminated“at a point about five feet eight — + | ® T6a . , | aa ‘Robert C. ‘Sessions, Direct Examination center of the machine downwardly on the upper creel board and on the trackway. | : Q. I bélieve you stated how many different outlets: | for air this apparatus. has, this-“elephant” trunk device? ~A- There is one completely rigid outlet and there are’ the outlets which I have numbered 1, 2; 3 and 5. The outer (258) tube 5 has, as I remember, three outlet holes at its lower end. : Q. State e whether or not you find: any benches in the a patent j in suit of the device of Exhibit 14. A. I think the | patent in suit certainly does not include any’ teaching as to the construction of an underfrarne cleaner, and the patent | in syit did not teach the use of the nozzles, such as is the nozzle 3 here. The teaching of the patent in suit was to the effect that one downwardly extended directed rigid outlet and one inwardly curved flexiblé nozzle located — suchas is the nozzle or cuff 2 of Exhibit 14 would clean the entire creel section, the upper end or spools of roving. ~ Apparently, the plaintiff here decided that the upper. | nozzle alone, such as ‘nozzle 2 of Exhibit 14, which would — correspond to cuff 19 of the patent in suit, would not clean the center portion of the creel part of the machine and so. has here done what may be an obvious thing: added another air outlet to direct the air where dirt would collect. | (262) Q. (By Mr. Watts) “Mr. Sessions, just to 0 keep the record straight’ there and all in one piece at this par- .ticular time, yesterday we heard testimony: as to horse- power of the apparatus of the patent in suit, and the horse- aes. “power of the moter-on the “elephant” trunk device in Ex- hibit 14. In one case, it was half a. horsepower, and the . other, one horsepower. Did you include ‘that with your differences between those two devices? A. Yes. The ca-_ “pacity of a unit to discharge air is relatively preportionate with the hiorsepower of the motor, so that-a unit using a larger horsepower motor can be used to. discharge r more air and cover a greater surface. | ‘ 4 oer ee ‘Robert C. Sessions, Cross Examination orcs , aaa ia | -Q. And since they used a larger horsepower. motor. in the “elephant” trunk apparatus, that. blows a greater amount of air, or r a greater —' of. air? A. Yes. That’s © right. ae \ Q. All as contrasted Sith the * apparatus of the patent ; a 1 (263) suit? a. Yes. is ad ‘Cross ExaMINaTION BY Mr. Grier. Fy ale ale . al. als oS ok : - SS 7° é (274) The Court: ‘He said he went into two nfills, and Bez. he found one five. feet 84% inches high, I believe, in the Smyre Mill which, as everybody knows, would likely hit the head of shinont anybody operating - a spinning frame re unless she was a pretty short girl | (285 )Q. But you testified that Mr. Holtzelaw’s con- clusion was obvious. A. Mr. Holtzclaw. didn’t direct his invention toward underframe cleaning. Now, as far as— Q. You think then, in other words, that what is illus- trated in, the drawing in the Holtzclaw patent is not so good, but that if you went along as far as doing all that is done in Plaintiff's Exhibit 16, which is the exhibit I show you, that that would be quite a trick? A. I don’t s think that was any trick either. In my opinion if one ~ ‘desires to spend the money to build a bigger machine with more nozzles and the cost of that machine can be compen- -- sated for by saving of labor, such as if labor costs increase, Pa Fs es - J . . . wages increase, it is a very obvious thing to build a bigger, more expensive machirie to cover more (286) area. En-— tirely obvious and an entirely simple answer to the’ prob- fem. bieciale angele: : } | (298) Q. Let’s tile: the lichondants’ Exhibit F ‘nik _ Jet me read (299) the language of Claim 6, and let me get. you to again point out to me how it is you say it is not * aeeieecs - Claim, 6. There is “a trackway disposed 78a os — Robert. Cc. —. Cross Examination above and longitudinally centrally of aie machines, * * * Do you find that cen in the defendant’s gevice: A. Yes. ; | it ee Q. (Reading): Gk said) cleaner having a motor driven carriage and “a a o It has a carriage, doesn’ t it? AL 7a. ° | Q. And it has a fan, eas t it? A. Yes, | Q.. And it has a motor for driving the fan? A. Yes It doesn’t have a. motor-driven carriage. ) Q. All right. The motor for propelling the carriage is in the tri-rail portion of the cleaner; is that right? A». Yes. ~ Q: And\I will ask you if the device shown as Defend- -ant’s Exhibit F wouldn’ t*be useless, so far as cleaning a: concerned, if it were not used in conjunction with the tri- rail cleaner, for the reason that it doesn’t have any means of its own for propelling itself along the track? A: Another means could be used. ~ Q. Like pulling it eng? A. Something or - other, yes. You wouldn’ t need a‘tri-raijl cleaner. (300) Q. ‘The practice of the American Monorail | Company is to install it in conjunction with the tri-rail - cleaner similar to that illustrated - on Plaintiff S Exhibit No. 2. Is that true? A. Yes. | sae Q. And the motor in the tri-rail drives it along the » track, doesn’t it? A. Yes, one of them does. — | Q: So that if this particular device indicated by De- fendant’s Exhibit F be considered by itself, it will not clean because it has got no way. to go along thé track. Is that right? A. It will not do the job of cleaning unless it is moved along. the track; that is right. | a Q. Yes. And when you use it in connection with the tri-rail cleaner and consider ‘it and the tri-rail as a unit, then it does have a motor driven carriage and fan. Is that right? A..Well, it does not have this motor driven | carriage to which this claim is restricted. The inventor in getting his patent chose to use restrictive language in this claim. Language could have been used and was used in some. of the prior patents to Hodge, for example, which . was not restricted to a single motor, although in some of © a Robert C. Sessions, Cross’ Examination Se -* . Q. And to those has been atbached flexible sleeves? 3 A. I wouldn’t call it a flexible sleeve; no. | 7 . Q. Has there been attached to it a sleeve ttn to the one which:is attached to Exhibit F? (334) A. No. -Q. Describe the: sleeve that has been attached... A. The item that has been atiached is made outof a very. heavy gasket material, and it is conically shaped. with the apex cut off, and it doesn’t yield very much upon hitting anyone. Q. Would it yield to such an extent. that it would not. hurt them if it hit them? A. No, I don’t think there is any _ advantage over a metal cuff; in fact, we had metal cuffs on them. : | 86a - ee oat : _ Lloyd R. en Cross Examination Q. Answer the seinen ‘Would it yield to such an | extent that if it came in contact with some person leaning» over the loom it would not hurt them? A. No, I think it would give them a pretty good. wallop. . Q. You think rather than the sleeve bending it b-aiealid | knock them away? A. I believe it would, yes, sir. Q. That is not flexible if it doesn’t do that. You say you first-had metal cuffs? A, We first had metal cuffs, yes. Q. What was the occasion for putting this other type “——-—- sleeve which you have described? A. Well, we didn’t have - the’ size that we wanted, and we simply made up these things in our office and put them on there with the correct . length we wanted. i (325) Q. So the flexible aie as an sidition to the loom ‘cleaner is something you just made up as a tempo- rary expedient? A. We made it up for that particular : application because it was quick to do and. we made it the size we wanted, | —_—— a peta eee 4 po. a -_ —rTet = r——4 a = i me: uo” - 3 —_ _— ~~ ~ - ~- 2° — a ews i TR om — A — - — ——_ os ae aan ome A ~ om — ~ - (— Ci now — 4 Cena : -- oe - gues — =: [on —s —_ y a i ~ - ~- ee Wait tiiey VA - + te Peemene: | Patented Oct. 10, 1950 me © UNITED | 95a 2,924,7 97 STATES PATENT OFFICE — 2,524,797 TRAVELING CLEANER FOR TEXTILE MACHINES OR THE LIKE Grover B. Holtzclaw, Charlotte, N. C., assignor to ‘ Parks-Cramer Company, Fitchburg, Mass., & corporation of Massachusetts Apesenten December 12, 1947, Serial No. 791, 349 (Cl. 15—812) ’ 6 Claims. ee 1 se This invention relates to improvements in traveling cleaners for textile machines or the like in which the traveling cleaner comprises a- carriage having a motor and a rotatable fan mounted upon ‘ trackway extending longi- tudinally above and centrally over a plurality of ‘machines which are arranged in longitudinal alinement. Means operable by the motor are respectively provided for propelling the carriage along the trackway and for rotating the fan. A housing which surrounds the motor is provided _ with outlet conduits for currents of air produced by the fan arranged transversely of the direction of travel of the cleaner and extending downward-_ -ly and outwardly. The end /of each conduit is provided with means respectively to direct a blast ininatie. of air, or upon mechanism for the ma- terial being treated located closely therebeneath. For example, in the use of the traveling cleaner for cleaning .a spinning frame.blasts of air are not fully effective in preventing accumulation of | lint ‘and tHe like upon the lower face of the: creel board and ‘upon the spools of roving located closely therebeneath and the deposition or ac- cumulation of bunches of. lint upon the roving running from said spools. - One of the objects of the invention is to provide a traveling cleaner of the type described with a nozzle for more effectively directing the current of air which is projected transversely across the machines at a predetermined height thereby ' more effectively to prevent accumulation of lint, of air downwardly upon the side of the machine — therebeneath and to direct a blast.of air trans- versely across the machines as the cleaner travels _ along the trackway.. In usual installations of textile machines a. plurality of series of longitudinally alined ma- chines are arranged in parallelism with the sec- tion of the trackway extending longitudinally of the machines of each series and connected to the trackway -of another series by U-shaped bends to provide a continuous trackway over all the machines. : Groups of such parallel series are also ar- ranged in longitudinal alinement with aisles be- ; tween the ends of the respective groups through which the operatives pass frequently in attending to the machines. Typical traveling cleaning mevhenion and the arrangement thereof of the character above de-. scribed are disclosed in.the following patents granted to William B. Hodge, Nos. 2,047,558 July 14; 1936, 2,128,207 August 23, 1938, and 2,184,880 December 26, 1939, and therefore need not be illustrated and described in.detail as the present invention relates only to improvements in the mechanism for directing the blasts of air de- livered by the fan. In-usual'traveling cleaners of the type above described the end of each air con- duit which extends from the fan casing is pro- vided with two preferably: @djustable sleeves or nozzles one of which directs the blast of air down- wardly upon the side of the machine therebe-, neath and the other of which directs the blast of air transversely across the machine. the sleeves or nozzles usually terminates above Each of. ; etc. upon such stationary parts of the machine | - and upon the material being treated thereby. Another object of the invention is to provide a highly flexible nozzle or nozzles particularly _that.for transmitting the current of air trans- . Shown in the drawings-as employ - versely across the machine which will yield upon impingement with an obstruction in the path thereof such as the presence of an operator in the . aisle between adjacent groups of machines therc- by preventing injury to the operator. ' These and other objects and features of the invention will more fully appear from the follow- ing description and the accompanying oe and will be partjcularly pointed out/in the‘clatz An illustrative embodiment of the invention is | for cleaning a textile machine, in which, Pig. 1 shows an end elevation of a spinning machine and trackway mounted thereon sup- porting a traveling cleaner and illustrating the present invention as embodied in said -cleaner . for directing a current of air transversely across the tov.of the machine and is ineffective in satis- — .factorily preventing deposition or accumulation of lint and the like upon rigid parts of the ma- chines not located in the direct paths of the the machine at a predetermined height; . Fig. 2 is an enlarged detail view, partially in transverse vertical section; and showing in eleva- tion a preferred form of fiexible nozzle for direct- ing the blast of air transversely of the machine; Fig. 3 is a transverse sect ional view on line 3—3 Fig. 2; and, , Fig. 4 is a diagrammatic plan view of a group of parallel series of alined/ machines with an end- - less trackway extending lohyitudinally over the machine and traveling cleaner mounted thereon and an aisle between alined groups of machines. The spinning.machine is of a usual character comprising end frames { having standards 2 mounted thereon supporting the usual creel boards 3 and 4 with spools of roving § there- between and posts. 6 extending upwardly from 96a - 9,094,707 . the standards 2 supporting B iii 1 which as above. described extend longitudinally of a plurality of or an alined series of spinning frames. A motor driven. carriage 8, which has wheels 8. mounted upon.parallel angle bars (@ extending longitudinally of and forming part of the track- way, is driven by a motor. A preferably hori- zontal fan {{ is mounted upon a vertical shaft extending upwardly from the carriage 8 and is driven by the motor therein. A preferably cylin- drical casing 12, which encloses the fan, is pro- vided at its upper end with a central air inlet 13 and has at its lower end downwardly and - outwardly extending and downwardly converg- ing conduits 14 and (8 for conducting currents of air produced by the fan. The fan casing is 4 through the aisle between adjacent alined series 10 of machines such as are illustrated in Fig. 4 of the drawings. It will be understood that the particular em- bodiment of the invention shown'and described herein is of an illustrative character and not re- © strictive and that various changes in form, con- struction and arrangement of parts may be made within the spirit and scope ' of the following claims. ° Having thus described the invention, what is claimed as new, and desired to be secured by _ Letters Patent, ts: 15 also provided adjacent the carriage with. outlets . 16, diametrically disposed adjacent the carriage 8, which are provided with adjustable dampers {7 for controlling and directing downward currents of air upon the machines therebeneath. Each of the conduits 14 and 16 has preferably adjustably secured to its lower end a downwardly extending sleeve or nozzle {8 for directing the blast of air |therefrom downwardly upon the side of the machine therebeneath and also a down- _ wardly extending sleeve or nozzle {8 for directing ~ ga current of air transversely across the machine. The conduits (8 and 18 are so disposed as to pro- © vide a leading and a trailing nozzle for each of the conduits (4 and {5 and the leading and trail- ' 1. The combination with. a waveline - cleaner. . for blowing lint, dust, and other foreign particles from. longitudinally alined machines having a. trackway disposed above and longitudinally cen- -trally of said machines, said ¢leaner having a 20 25 30 ing nozzles are reversely arranged upon the con- | duits (4 and (6. In the present invention either or. both of the nozzles may be of highly flexible material adapted to yield upon impingement of an obstruction in ‘the path of travel of the nozzles., Preferably the nozzles {8 of the machine are of rigid material and terminate at such height as not to engage an .obstruction such as an operator passing through the aisle between groups of machines. 35 40 The nozzle 18, which conducts the blast of air | - transversely of the machines, is of highly flexible material and extends well below the «nd of the nozzle 18 and is provided with an inwardly curved and preferabby tapering end portion which is positioned at such prédetermined height as to direct the air inwardly beneath the creel board 4 thereby to prevent accumulation of lint upon the under face of the creel board or upon the spool of roving & and the strand 28 leading therefrom through ‘the usual guide eye 2! and drawing mechanism 22 to the ring rail 23 having the usual ring: and traveler for spinning and winding the strand 26 upon the bobbin 24. Preferably the sleeve or nozzle {$8 comprises a cuff of suitable woven fabric which -desirably is 45 50 55 impregnated with suitable material to make it-- impervious to the blast of air passing there- through and is .provided with means for retaining it in expanded condition. As illustrated in Fig. 3 the end 26 of the cuff is folded around a thin ring 26 of rigid- material which is permanently secured within the folds thereof. The cuff may be of anv desired length *v position its outlet at such predetermined. height as to direct the current ‘of air transversely across the machine closely beneath the creel board of the spinning frame, or beneath similar obstructions in other machines, thereby effectively to prevent or re- move accumulation upon parts thereof which . otherwise would obstruct such transverse blasts of air. The cuff of flexible materia! will yield upon impingement with any obstruction in its path such as the presence of an operator passing 60 motor driven carriage and fan with means op- erable by said motor for propelling the carriage along the trackway and for rotating said fan, a fan casing enclosing the fan having an inlet and — oppositely positioned downwardly and laterally . extending outlet conduits terminating above the machines for currents of air produced by the fan, and each of said conduits having at its end rigid means for directing a blast of air downwardly the sides of the machines therebeneath, of means for directing a blast of air transversely across the machines comprising a cuff of highly flexible material extending downwardly from one of said outlet conduits and provided with an in- | wardly curved end portian directed across the machine at a predetermined height. ~ 2. The combination with. a traveling cleaner, for: blowing lint, dust, and other foreign particles from longitudinally alined machines having a trackway disposed above and longitudinally cen- trally of said machines, said cleaner having a motcr driven carriage and fan with means oper-. ‘able by said motor for. propelling the carriage along the trackway and for rotating said fan, a ‘fan casing enclosing the fan having an inlet and a pair 6f oppositely positioned. downwardly and — laterally extending rigid outlet conduits for cur- rents of air produced by the fan, each of said conduits having at its end a nozzle for respec- tively directing blasts of air downwardly upon the side of the machine therebeneath, of means for directing blasts of air transversely across the. machine comprising .an inwardly curved cuff of highly flexible substantially impervious fabric extending downwardly and inwardly from each one of said. outlet conduits at such predetermined height as to prevent deposition of lint and dust from accumulating on the, material being proc- essed by the m es. - 3. A traveling cleaner, for blowing lint, dust, and other foreign particles from longitudinally alined machines having a trackway disposed above and longitudinally centrally of said ma- _— chines, said cleaner having a motor driven car- . riage and fan with means operable by said motor . the fan having an inlet and oppositely positioned . 70 for propelling the carriage along the trackway . and for rotating said fan, a fan casing enclosing | downwardly and laterally extending rigid outlet conduits for currents of air produced by the fan, each of said-conduits having at its end a leading and a trailing nozzle one of which is of rigid material terminating s»ove the machines for , directing a blast of air therefrom downwardly upon the side of the machine therebeneath and. the other of which is of greater length extending alongside the machine and of substantially im- 2 Pr. ; nestiuas fabric having an inwardly curved, con- verging end portion for directing the blast of air therefrom. transversely across the machine at _a predetermined height and yieldable upon oe pingement with an en bas its. path of. travel. 4. A traveling cine. ‘tor blowing lint, dust, , ' and other foreign particles from longitudinally alined machines having a trackway disposed above and Jongitudinally centrally of said ma- _chines, said cleaner. having a motor driven car- riage and fan with means operable by said motor and for rotating said fan, a fan casing enclosing the fan having an inlet and oppositely positioned downwardly and iaterally extending outlet con- duits for currents of air. produced by the fan, each of said conduits having at its end a leading and a trailing nozzle one of which is of rigid material terminating above the machines for directing a blast of air therefrom downwardly upon .he side of the machine therebeneath and : the other of which is of greater length extending - alongside the machines and of substantially im- pervious fabric having an inwardly curved, con- verging end portion for directing the blast of air _ therefrom transversely across the mactiine at a predetermined height and yieldable upon im- - pingement- with an obstruction in its. path of travel, and means at the end of said cuff for retaining it in expanded position. 5. The combination with a traveling cleaner, for blowing lint, dust, and other foreign particles from longitudinally alined machines having a trackway disposed above and longitudinally cen- traly of said machines, said cleaner having a motor driven carriage and fan’ with means .op- ‘erable by said motor ‘for propelling the carriage along the trackway and for rotating said fan,.a fan casing enclosing the fan having an inlet and oppositely positioned downwardly and_tlaterally extending outlet conduits for currents of air pro- . duced by the fan, of a leading and a trailing ~ nozzle for each of said conduits, one of which nozzles is of rigid material for directing a blast of air therefrom downwardly. upon the sides of . the machines therebeneath and the other of which is provided with a downwardly extending cuff of substantially impervious fabric extending _ alongside the machines and has an — — \ 97a curved, converging end portion for directing the blast .of air therefrom transversely. across the machines at a predetermined height and yield- able upon impingement with an obstruction in . its path of travel, the end of said fabric cult being folded around and secured to a thin ring to retain it in expanded position. 6. ‘The combination with a traveling cleaner. ' for blowing lint, dust, and other foreign par- 10 ticles from longitudinally alined machines having _a@ -trackway disposed above:and longitudinally ’ centrally of said machines, said cleaner having 15° 20 25 || oa for propelling the carriage along the trackway .. a motor driven carriage and fan with means op- erable by said motor for propelling the carriage — along the trackway and for rotating said fan, and © a fan casing enclosing the fan having an inlet and oppositely positioned outlet conduits, of the construction in which the said conduits present a rigid section terminating above the heads of the machine operators when. standing, and in -which the said conduits at each side are provided with a cuff of highly flexible material extending therefrom toward: the machines to enable cur- rents of air produced by the fan and discharged through the cuffs to be directed against the ma- chines and the cuffs to yield upon impingement with an operator or. other obstruction in their st of travel. GROVER B. HOLTZCLAW. | REFERENCES ‘CITED The folowing referenc¢s are of record in the file of this patent: UNITED STATES PATENTS Number Name re ‘Date . 490,269 a Jan. 24; 1893 1,586,706 - Russell .---.----- ‘June 1. 1926' 4781,142 Walker 4. tines tome Nov. 11, 1930 1,920,768 BE citnewkencninae Aug. 1, 1933. aut mee: . Peeage ........-.-.- July 14, 1936 2,068,496 Linghammar -_----~- Jan. 19; 1937 pe ee ee June 17, 1941 2,330,568. Erickson __________- Sept. 28, 1943 FOR FIGN PATENTS Number Country Date | 25,205. .. Norway -....=-_---- Nov. 9, 1914 643.493 France ..--....-_- Sept. 18, 1928 1 cLEANING PROBLEM ~ ° = « * 7 a’ ° . ‘ . a . ° , ‘ e - ag \ ° , . ; SOC RAO LAMM TAD AP LE , s . ’ a This new American MonoRail Cleaner seids con- trolled currents of ajr across three separate areas — 1. A high velocity air foil type fan cleans all geiling areas. 2. A turbo type fan sends: controlled air " currents across roving and creel. x I Another separate turbo fan directs high velocity currents toward the areas under. the frame. | Travelling automatically as a unit, this new American MonoRail Cleaner covers as many as twelve frames depending on mill conditions. : Let an experienced engineer recommend the type of wl | cleaning to give greatest coverage in your mill. & | ‘ | aoe | ; AMERICAN : | ca ae ONORLAIL” HANDLING » " €QUIPMENT "7 i ee : | | | 13106 ATHENS AVENUE -° CLEVELAND 7, OHIO 142 | | For further information use Handy Return Card, Page 197 ’ . TEXTILE INDUSTRIES for November, 1955 ‘ 9 — i. s : PLAINTIFF S EXHIBIT 19. ‘a Ad of Cleaner Charged to Infringe Patent in Suit. aan Pit 7r /9 ? ae 4 PLAINTIFF'S, EXHIBIT 20. | American Monorail’s Flexible Sleeve Cleaner Installed in Tronten Cotton Mills. COLAC PPE LEPC LPA LLY wv a te PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT 24. = =—————s gga July 14,1936. ==. HODGE =——S—S~=« = 047,588. je LBANING APPARATUS POR MACHINERY oe | | 7 Filed July al, 1955 | 2 Sheets-Sheet as ~ 4 ; | r ’ 2 | ; . | an | ast WILL 1AM B-HOBGE Note Pages 107a - 109a are on card 6a. (Even numbered pages when not reproduced, are blank pages ) et July 14, 1936. . . re o. - —-105a W.B. HODGE: > 2,047,558 CLEANING APPARATUS FOR MACHINERY Filed July 21; 1933 2 Sheets-Sheet 2 : 1 Miuam BHoDGE oo _grwvento ‘. .) PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT 29. oe — Aug. 1, 1933. | w.y.smitH ~————s«*&2:;, 920, 768 APPARATUS FOR OPERATING ON SPINNING FRAMES AND OTHER MACHINES y Filed Dec. 31, 1928. .5 Sheets-Sheet 1 ke ee. Re ." | 2AY ——— | . —10Z | | MZ & ‘ terme, . * ie, ae — 113a ‘Aug. 1, 1933. a : ee SMITH: 1,920,768. « APPARATUS FOR OPERATING ON SPINNING FRAMES AND — MACHINES | cues | | — Dec. Sl, 1928 a. Sheets-Sheet = q 1Gg= y} 7 y} a Uipeipn :3 AS ANN 3 _ S|) URED CTR | | | | _— ©. ae ; ee Gr ee E ee SSS SN | Is SHPH 4 eta: - — - ~_ — ee ee ——-- ——- ee wee _ a py a P % : ve e if > iy i ‘ “ : AS t— 28 As td de oe 2. 4 a, es 4 HO i ZZ 1% a T /N 7 a rd Ff ihe LL * VG, FA WY “= rN Nn 3 Ko j 8 tele 4 SMH IPBAPAMBOCMPADAAGQAAABM#AEABMAMAACAACM AEE , . pan, | [Text truncated at 120,000 characters. The full text is on the page linked above.] --- Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/brief%3Amicro_IA40386418_1577%3A3. Public record. Not legal advice.