and destroys competition is as injurious to the community and as obnoxious to sound public policy as if the confederates were dealing in unpatented articles. To the present case may well be applied the remarks of the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania in Morris Run Coal Co. v. Barclay Coal Co., supra: This combination has a power in its confederated form, which no individual action can confer. By the united action of more than a score of different manufacturers natural and salutary competition is destroyed. To sanction such a result because accomplished by a combination of patentees would be, I think, to pervert the patent laws. Moreover, it is to be noted that under these license contracts the licensees can only make or sell their own specific form of harrow. All other forms, whether patented or unpatented, are prohibited to them. For this interdiction there is no justification. In the case of The National Harrow Co. v. Quick (ante, 501; 76 O. G., 1574; 67 Fed. Rep., 130) Judge Baker expressed the opinion that this combination was unlawful and against sound public policy. I am constrained to regard the license contracts sued on as part of an illegal combination and in unwarrantable restraint of trade. I must, therefore, deny the plaintiff the relief sought. The other defenses I need not consider. The matter of the cross-bill was not much noticed by counsel, if discussed at all. My conclusion is that the plaintiffs therein have not shown themselves to be entitled to affirmative relief. They entered into this combination voluntarily. The preliminary agreement does not remain executory in any particular. These cross-plaintiffs do not owe any duty or service to the public the performance of which is hindered by an improvident and unlawful contract. No special ground for equitable relief is disclosed by the cross-bill, and the plaintiff's therein do not require a decree of cancellation in order to defend against suits based upon the license contracts. The cross-bill will be dismissed without prejudice to the right of the plaintiffs therein to defend against suits or their rights to maintain a bill should circumstances or exigencies arise to justify equitable interposition. Let a decree be drawn in conformity with the views expressed in the foregoing opinion. [U. S. Circuit Court of Appeals-Sixth Circuit.] DUEBER WATCH CASE MANUFACTURING COMPANY et al. v. ROB BINS et al. Decided May 12, 1896. 1. COLBY-WATCH-PENDANT-VOID AND NOT INFRINGED. Letters Patent No. 287,001, granted October 23, 1883, to Caleb K. Colby, for a watch-pendant, examined and claim 1 thereof Held void for want of invention in view of the prior state of the art, and, if valid, Held not infringed. 2. INFRINGEMENT-LICENSE-ESTOPPEL. The fact that defendant was a licensee cannot estop him from disputing the validity of the patent under which he takes his license in a suit for infringements charged to have taken place after the license was drawn, though in a doubtful case it might have considerable evidential force as an admission of validity. 3. INVENTION EXTENSIVE USE-OTHER CAUSE. Extensive use is only to be considered evidence of invention in doubtful cases and it loses its force when attributable to another device used in connection with the alleged invention and which was useful and popular. APPEAL from the Circuit Court of the United States for the Eastern Division of the Northern District of Ohio. Mr. Chas. R. Miller and Mr. Robt. H. Parkinson for the appellants. Mr. Lysander Hill for the appellees. STATEMENT OF THE CASE. This was a suit in equity by Royal E. Robbins and Thomas M. Avery against the Dueber Watch Case Manufacturing Company, John C. Dueber, its president, and William C. Moore, its secretary and treasurer, for alleged infringement of a patent relating to stem-winding watches. The Circuit Court entered an interlocutory decree sustaining the patent, finding infringement, and referring the case to a master for an accounting. (Ante, 202; 74 O. G., 965; 71 Fed. Rep., 189.) Defendants have appealed. This is an appeal from a decree enjoining the infringement of a patent. R. E. Robbins and Thomas M. Avery, as trustees, held the title, by assignment, to a patent (No. 287,001) issued on October 23, 1883, upon an application made February 1, 1883, to Caleb K. Colby, for a new and useful improvement in stem-winding watches. It was averred in the bill and appeared in the evidence that the Dueber Watch Case Manufacturing Company had taken a license from Robbins and Avery of the following patents for improvements in watchcases: No. 192,425, issued June 26, 1877, to Fisher and Lucas; No. 220,916, issued October 28, 1879, to E. C. Fitch; No. 287,001, issued October 23, 1883, to C. K. Colby, and No. 312,856, issued February 24, 1885, to George Hunter. On the 13th of February, 1891, the license was terminated because of the failure of the defendant company to make returns and payments in accordance with its provisions. The defenses set up in the answer were want of novelty, anticipation, and non-infringement. The Colby invention relates to the class of watches known as "stem-winding watches," in which a key or stem arbor passes through the hollow stem of the case into engagement with the winding arbor of the watchmovement, so that by the rotation of the key the watch may be wound. By its longitudinal movement within the stem the key may be retracted from the winding-arbor of the movement sufficiently to allow the move ment to be easily lifted out of the case or inserted therein. The gist of the device is in providing a spring-latch within the hollow stem, by which the key and stem may be latched to each other in such a manner that the key will be held in its inner position, but will yield upon effort and allow the key to be retracted a certain distance, when the spring will again operate as a latch to secure the key in the second or outer position, from which it can by another effort be pushed back to its first position. The patent describes the essential feature of the deviceas an elastic or spring-latch attachment of the stem with the key, whereby the latter is free to rotate, but is prevented from being moved longitudinally except by a special effort. The specification and drawings describe the various forms of the device. In some of them the spring-latch is attached to the stem and engages in a circumferential groove upon the key, and in others the spring is attached to the key and engages in a circumferential groove on the stem. In others a shoulder is substituted for the groove. Figs. 1, 2, 6, 7, 10, 11, and 12 in the Colby patent give a sufficient understanding of the operation of the device and its variations. The figures are as follows: The inventor describes the purpose of his invention as follows: My invention relates to a stem-winding pendant for watches, being especially adapted to that class of watches wherein the back of the case is permanently closed and the movement, or the ring in which it is mounted, is hinged to the cup like case. My pendant may, however, be used in any watch case. In watches having stem-winding pendants the key in the pendant passes into the movement and engages a socket or square in or on the winding-arbor, and before the movement can be lifted out or turned on its hinge this key must be disengaged from the movement by withdrawing it far enough to clear the latter. My invention provides a ready means for doing this. * Figure 1 is a vertical mid-section of a watch-pendant provided with my improvements, the plane of the section being taken edgewise of the watch-case, and the key shown as protruding into the hollow of the winding-arbor. Fig. 2 is a similar section taken at right angles to Fig. 1, showing the key withdrawn, so as to permit the movement to be lifted out. A is the watch-case. B is the tubular stem, attached to the case in the usual way. C is the key, and D is the crown attached thereto to form a head or thumb-piece, by which the key is turned in winding. These parts, per se, are common in stem winding and setting watches. a and a' are two internal circular grooves at different depths in the hollow of the stem. They form latch-bearings for the rotating key. To the crown D or the key C, indifferently, are secured latch spring or springs bb, preferably four in number, provided with projecting angles or parts b'. These angles spring into and engage one or the other of the grooves a a', and the springs are inserted in the hollow of the stem, as shown in Figs. 1 and 2. When the key is pressed clear down into the hollow of the stem, the elasticity of the springs causes the projections b', to engage in the lower groove, a. The key will now be in engagement with the winding arbor C in the movement F, (if there be a movement in the case,) and by rotating the key in the usual way the watch will be wound up. The bearing which the key finds in the neck of the stem and that which the crown finds on the exterior surface of the stem prevent any lateral play of the key, and the engagement of the latch-spring b in groove a prevents any longitudinal movement of the key, unless some force is applied to move it. In other words, the key rotates readily, but only yields to extra pressure purposely exerted when an attempt is made to withdraw it longitudinally. If, however, it be desired to disengage the key from the movement for any purpose whatever, the operator may grasp the crown, and pull on it with force sufficient to disengage the springs from groove a, when the key may be withdrawn far enough for the projection b' to engage groove a'. The parts will now assume the position shown in Fig. 2. The key will be withdrawn far enough to be free from the movement, and it may be rotated freely in this position in the bearing found in the groove a'. In lieu of employing the two grooves a a' in the stem and one series of projections b' on the springs, I may employ but one groove a, as in Fig. 6, and provide the springs with two series of projections b'. In Fig. 7 1 have shown a further modification, in which the springs are mounted in the hollow of the stem, and the two series of projections b' thereon protrude through slots in the wall of the stem. A groove in the margin of the opening in the hollow crown D takes over and engages the lower one of these projections, as clearly shown in said figure. In Fig. 10 I have shown the grooves a and a' formed in the shank of the key itself and the latchsprings mounted in the stem, and in Fig. 11 I have shown the same arrangement, except that the key is provided with projecting ribs b', and the springs have recesses a to engage said ribs. In Fig. 12 I have shown the grooves a a ́ arranged exteriorly # * * * I have of the stem and the springs arranged to engage them in that position. shown all of these forms and modifications in order to illustrate the many ways in which my invention may be carried out. The essential feature of all is the elastic or spring latch attachment of the stem B with the key C, whereby the latter is free to rotate, but is prevented from being moved longitudinally, except by a special effort. The annular groove or rib engaged by the spring-latch I denominate an "annular latch device," and it is immaterial whether the projecting part is on the spring or the other part, and it is also immaterial whether the spring be connected with the key or the tubular stem. The operation is the same in either case. The upper groove, a', in the stem is not absolutely necessary, as it is not necessary that the key shall be rotative when drawn back, as in Fig. 2; but some form of stop should be provided to prevent the key from being entirely withdrawn. This withdrawal of the key is not desirable, although it will do no particular harm. I have not shown how my key C may be employed as a push-pin for releasing the lid of the case from its spring-catch, as I make no claim to this. I will say, however, that the tip of the key passes through the case-spring, and a shoulder on its shank rests on the latter. The retaining groove a is made wide enough to allow of the necessary slight movement longitudinally of the key. This is a common mode of constructing such push-pin devices. It must be borne in mind that my invention is designed to be applied only to the pendants of stem-winding watches wherein the key is mounted rotatively in the stem and projects normally into the movement to engage the winding-arbor. The drawings of the patent are as follows: I am aware that it has been proposed to provide "key-winding watches," so called, with a chambered stem, and to insert the key into this stem simply as a retainingpocket, wherein it is held by a spring to prevent it from dropping out. In this construction, however, the key does not project into the hollow of the case, nor is it desirable or necessary that the chamber in the stem shall connect with the hollow cavity of the case, except incidentally to provide room. Keys mounted in pockets |