PATENTS. 



621 



claim must play a part in the operation of the 

 machine. This refers to the claim for com- 

 bination. When it comes to the claims for 

 parts, no part can be individually claimed out- 

 side of the combination, unless it is strictly es- 

 sential to the working of the device. Thus, 

 an automatic regulator working a steam- valve 

 may be the subject of a patent for the com- 

 bination. If the regulator is a separate struct- 

 ure, actuating or working a newly invented 

 valve, and adaptable to other valves, the valve 

 could not, as a separate device, be claimed in 

 the same patent with that for the combination. 

 Two or more patents should be taken out, one 

 for the combination and one for the valve, and 

 one for each other individual and replaceable 

 element of the combination. When a patent 

 for a combination comes before it, the office 

 first examines into the mutual dependence of 

 the elements of the combination. If these 

 parts do not in the strictest sense work to- 

 gether, or co-operate for the same end, if they 

 can be separated into two or more distinct and 

 individually operative devices, which will work 

 independently, the examiner will do it, and re- 

 fuse a single patent for a supposed combination, 

 which is really an aggregation. If the combi- 

 nation is allowed, and an attempt is made to 

 claim individually different elements as having 

 some peculiarities of structure, additional pat- 

 ents will be demanded for these, if known 

 equivalents can be substituted for them in the 

 combination. The decisions of the Supreme 

 Court on reissues are the most important judi- 

 cial decisions of the past few years ; so in office 

 practice the rulings on combinations constitute 

 the most important of recent changes. 



Interference. The person to whom the patent 

 is granted must, as far as the office knows, be 

 the original inventor. If a patent has been 

 granted to one who is a second or third in- 

 ventor, the first inventor can claim his patent 

 in the face of the preceding grant, provided 

 the prior use and publication conditions are 

 good. This constitutes one of the phases of 

 interference. An interference between two or 

 more inventors means a proceeding instituted 

 on account of a conflict of claims to being the 

 first inventor of any specific device. There 

 are eight such cases of conflict: 1. Between 

 two or more original applications. 2. Between 

 an original application and an unexpired pat- 

 ent. 3. Between an original application and 

 an application for reissue of a patent granted 

 during pendency of such application. 4. Be- 

 tween an original application and an applica- 

 tion for reissue of a preceding patent. 5. Be- 

 tween two or more applications for reissue of 

 patents granted on applications pending at the 

 same time. 6. Between two or more appli- 

 cations for reissue of patents granted on appli- 

 cations not pending at the same time. 7. Be- 

 tween a reissue application and an unexpired 

 patent, whose original applications were pend- 

 ing at the same time. 8. Between an appli- 

 cation for reissue of a later unexpired patent, 



and an earlier unexpired patent granted before 

 the original application of the later patent was 

 filed. In cases 2, 4, 6, 7, and 8, affidavits nni-i 

 be filed by the party latest in date of appli- 

 cation, either original or reissue, such affidavit 

 declaring that he is the original inventor. In- 

 terferences in the above-named cases will be 

 declared by the Patent Office. Before declara- 

 tion, all the preliminary work necessary to put 

 the new applications in shape for granting the 

 application must be completed, so that when 

 the interference is decided, the new patent, if 

 it wins, shall be ready for issue. 



As we are now treating of a proceeding in 

 the Patent-Office, the staff of the office may be 

 mentioned. Its head is the Commissioner of 

 Patents. All communications relating to the 

 office should be addressed to him under that 

 title. The working force to whom the exami- 

 nation of applications for patents is intrusted, 

 are called primary examiners. Between these 

 two ranks there is a Board of Examiners, who 

 hear appeals from the decisions of the primary 

 examiners. An examiner of interferences com- 

 pletes the list. 



The interference proceedings are conducted 

 before the examiner of interferences. The 

 issue between the parties must, before decla- 

 ration of interference, be clearly defined by 

 the primary examiner to the satisfaction of 

 himself and the examiner of interferences. In 

 case of disagreement, reference is made to the 

 commissioner for decision. Until declaration 

 of interference has been made, the primary 

 examiner retains jurisdiction of the case; 

 afterward it passes to the examiner of inter- 

 ferences. The interference is pro forma insti- 

 tuted and declared by forwarding the notices 

 to the several parties to the interference, or to 

 their attorneys, or assignees. If two parties 

 are represented by the same attorney, notice 

 will be sent to each of them, as well as to their 

 attorney. The proceedings will then begin. 

 The rules will be found in the u Rules of Prac- 

 tice of the United States Patent-Office," rules 

 92-127. The exact procedure need not be de- 

 tailed here. The rules to be observed are as 

 strict as those of the regular law courts, and 

 the whole proceedings are based upon a system 

 analogous to court practice. When an inter- 

 ference is decided, the party making applica- 

 tion is given a patent, if he wins. Thus a very 

 peculiar condition of things may arise in cases 

 where the interference is between a patent al- 

 ready granted and a new application for the 

 same invention. The Commissioner of Pat- 

 ents has no right to cancel a patent already 

 granted, so that two patents may be in the 

 field, one several years later in date than the 

 other, yet the later one will be held the pre- 

 vailing and valid patent.. Sometimes these 

 proceedings give rise to what may be termed 

 hardships. Two inventors may go into in- 

 terference, and one of them, during the time 

 of the proceedings, which are often prolonged, 

 may manufacture and make a profit out of 



