The opinion of the court was delivered by: GALSTON
This is a patent infringement suit involving patent No. 1,407,297 issued February 21, 1922, to Thomas W. Pritchard. The patent covers a cleaning and scouring compound, and the process for manufacturing it.
Invalidity and noninfringement are urged as defenses.
The patentee states that the essential element of his compound is pine oil, which he describes as: "The oil obtained from resinous pine or fir wood by destructive distillation or by any process by which turpentine is obtained, and is a clear liquid of oily consistency varying in color from white to yellow having an odor somewhat suggestive of freshly cut pine saw-dust having a specific gravity varying from .89 to .95 at 20 degrees C. and a refractive index at 20 degrees C. approximately around 1.4860 and is free from turpentine and also free from any creosote or other products of destructive distillation of the wood."
The inventor thus sought to define a specific variety of pine oil, for he says: "The precise composition of pine oil is somewhat variable and all its constituents are not known to me. Furthermore, in recent years the article sold as pine oil has varied considerably in its composition. I am, therefore, as yet unable to say the precise constituent or constituents of pine oil which give to it the great advantage that I have discovered in the treatment of textiles. In referring herein to pine oil, therefore, I wish to be understood to mean those volatile distillates containing an effective proportion of the essential constituents of pine oil or equivalents thereof."
In describing the process of manufacture, the specification states: "I take one part of neutral vegetable oil soap, such as castile soap and three parts of water and dissolve the soap in the water. I then heat the solution and add gradually the pine oil sufficient to form a gelatinous mixture of about the consistency of table jelly. The amount of pine oil necessary is about two parts to 4 parts of the mixture so that the mixture when complete contains about one part by weight of soap, two parts of pine oil and three parts of water."
All five claims of the patent are in issue. They read:
"1. The herein described cleaning and scouring compound consisting of soap produced from natural fat and alkali, water, and pine oil produced from resinous wood by distillation and free from turpentine."
"2. The herein described cleaning and scouring compound consisting of soap produced from vegetable oil and alkali, water, and pine oil produced from resinous wood by distillation and free from turpentine."
"3. The herein described cleaning and scouring compound consisting of soap produced from vegetable oil and alkali, water, and pine oil produced from resinous wood by distillation and free from turpentine, combined together to form a colloidal mass."
"4. The herein described cleaning and scouring compound consisting of soap produced from vegetable oil and alkali, water, and pine oil produced from resinous wood by distillation and free from turpentine, in the proportions of one part of soap, three parts of water and two parts of pine oil."
"5. The herein described process of forming a colloidal mass containing pine oil produced from resinous wood by distillation and slightly soluble only in water, which consists in dissolving soap produced from natural fat and alkali in water, heating the solution and gradually introducing the pine oil."
It will be noted that claim I defines the compound broadly, without limitation of the percentages of the three ingredients. Claim 2 is somewhat narrower, limiting the natural fat, from which the soap is produced, to vegetable oil. Claim 3 limits claim 2 by referring to the combination as a colloidal mass. Claim 4 defines the proportions of the compound: Soap, one part; water, three parts; pine oil, two parts. Claim 5 is the process claim.
In contending that the patent is invalid, the defendants assert not merely lack of invention, but set forth anticipations in the form of patents, publications, and prior uses.
From these it is reasonably clear that standard commercial pine oil was known in the art long prior to September 24, 1917, the filing date of the application for the patent in suit.
In the patent to Ellis, for example. No. 1,006,736, granted October 24, 1911, it is said: "Pine oil obtained from the long-leaf pine or from other sources, is a desirable disinfectant, particularly when in a finely divided form, such as is effected by means of soap emulsions." No further limitation of the kind of pine oil is set forth.
In British patent, No. 15,643, of 1915 to Farley, for an improved cleansing compound, pine oil is referred to as an ingredient, but with no definition of its essential characteristics.
In the specifications of the United States Navy, issued March 1, 1915, the properties of pine oil for Navy Department use are defined:
"Pine oil must be a properly prepared light straw-colored oil produced by redistillation of heavy, high boiling point fractions resulting from the steam distillation of wood turpentine, and shall have a strong aromatic odor resembling turpentine. The specific gravity shall be not greater than 0.937 and not less than 0.933 at 60 degrees F.
"(a) One hundred c.c. of the oil when subjected to distillation in the standard Engler distilling flask must yield at least 95 per cent of distillate between the temperatures 375 degrees F. and 475 degrees F."
In an article by J. E. Teeple, published in the Journal of the American Chemical Society in 1908, pine oil is defined as a by-product in the extraction of turpentine by means of steam.
The plaintiff contends that one of the disadvantages of the pine oil in use prior to his invention was the offensive odor of the preparation employed. It is therefore significant, in determining what Teeple meant by pine oil, to note: "When properly refined it has a very pleasant odor which leads to its use by the essential oil trade in general and by soap makers in particular for perfuming cheaper soaps." And he adds: "The commercial long leaf oil, as it comes on the market, is either clear and water white, containing 3 or 4 per cent. of dissolved water, or it may have a very faint yellow color and be free from dissolved water. The specific gravity ranges from 0.935 to 0.947, depending on freedom from lower boiling terpenes. A good commercial product will begin distilling at about 206 degrees to 210 degrees and 75 per cent. of it will distill between the limits 211 degrees-218 degrees, and 50 per cent. of it between 213-217 degrees. A sample having a density of 0.945 at 15.5 degrees showed a specific rotation of about (a) 20 degrees D -- II degrees, and an index of refraction of NÅ 1.4830. In fractional distillation of the oil the specific gravity of the various distillates rises regularly with increasing temperature, becoming steady at about 0.947 at 217 degrees."
Pine oil thus described seems reasonably within the range defined by Pritchard. The color is the same. The odor is agreeable. The specific gravity ranges from 0.935 to 0.947 (Pritchard's maximum is .95 at 20 degrees C,) and the index of refraction is stated as 1.4830 as against Pritchard's figure of 1.4860 at 20 degrees C. Moreover, from the proof in the case it appears that a pine oil which begins distilling at 206 degrees to 210 degrees C cannot contain turpentine; nor can a pine oil, of which 75 per cent. distills between the limits of 211-218 degrees and 50 per cent. between 213-217 degrees, contain any substantial proportion of creosote.
Pine oils from steam distillation are also referred to in the Veitch and Donk article published December 12, 1911. The specific gravity of such pine oil, as obtained from steam distillation, is set forth in ranges from 9.8890 to 0.9600; refractive index from 1.475 to 1.500. The distillation is said to begin at 165 degrees to 180 degrees C, and generally complete at from 215 to 240 degrees; the larger quantity of most pine oils distilling between 190 degrees and 225 degrees.
The absence of creosote and tar is referred to, and Donk, a witness in the case, testified that pine oil, at the time of the writing of the article, did not contain either turpentine or creosote.
I conclude, therefore, that pine oil as defined by Pritchard was known as a commercial article prior to the date of his application for letters patent.
Claim 1 describes a compound of soap produced from natural fat and alkali, water, and pine oil. The Mackie Pine Products Company, in the year 1915, manufactured and sold a ...