Page images
PDF
EPUB
[merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][subsumed][ocr errors][merged small][subsumed][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][ocr errors][merged small]
[ocr errors]

92 C. Cls. Reporter's Statement of the Case wards as at 24 joining the bottom of the bulkhead structure. References to Figs. 5, 6, 7, 8 illustrate the position of the bulkhead in its relation to the hull proper.

At section 5—5 the bottom of the bulkhead structure is flat, but from that section extending aft to section 949 there is provided a longitudinal recess, centrally located in the bottom. This recess shown in Figs. 6, 7, and 8 decreases gradually as it proceeds aft.

The vessel is designed to be driven by two propellers 25 and they are “located in line with the longitudinal recess in the bottom of the bulkhead structure thereby receiving continuously a free and solid flow of water for their efficient operation," line 7 to 13, page 2 of Specification.

In describing the operation and advantages of his construction attributable to its novel form the patentee states, line 18 to 29, page 2 of Specification, “It will be observed that the forward wedge-shaped portion of the vessel is comparatively slender, thereby producing a reduced bow wave which is thrown further aft than usual, and dividing the water so that the ship tends to go through without rising. Coming to the midship portion, the water divided by the wedge passes guided by the sides 23 of the bulkhead structure, to either side, and comparatively undisturbed water is left, over which the recessed bottom of the bulkhead structure can glide."

5. There is no suggestion or showing in the patent in suit that protection from torpedo attack or any other exterior explosive medium was within the concept of the inventor.

The fundamental principle and the means provided for its accomplishment was to produce a more efficient shaped body contour for marine vessels, to the end that the draft was reduced, speed increased, and the general performance at sea improved.

6. The patent broadly consists of two elements, a hull portion of a particular shape and a surrounding bulkhead element with definite physical characteristics.

The patentee states, pages 1 and 2 of the Specification, lines 83 to 108 and 1-3, that the bulkhead or outer skin “surrounds the flat bottom of the hull and part of the sides thereof in the midship body of the hull and for some dis

316

Reporter's Statement of the Case

tance on the forebody, the width of the bulkhead bottom expanding gradually along fine lines from the section 4-4 to amidship and thence gradually decreasing to the plane indicated by the section line 9—9. The greatest width at the bulkhead bottom exceeds considerably that of the greatest width of beam, as clearly shown in Fig. 2 of the drawings. The bulkhead structure may be divided transversely into a plurality of water tight compartments which may be used as coal bunkers and for other storage purposes and also engine rooms. The bottom of the bulkhead structure is flat in the plane 5–5, as indicated above, and then longitudinally recessed, flattening out gradually until it joins the stern at plane 9–9. The depth of the recess decreases thus gradually as it proceeds aft.”

The recess just referred to according to the patentee is of particular importance for the “propellers are located below the rising bottom portion of the hull in the afterbody and in line with the longitudinal recess in the bottom portion of the bulkhead structure, thereby receiving continuously a free and solid flow of water for their efficient operation,” lines 7 to 13, page 2, Specification.

7. All the claims of the patent in suit are relied upon. Claim 1 reads as follows:

1. A marine vessel comprising a hull and a longitudinal laterally extending exterior bulkhead structure thereon surrounding the bottom and part of the sides of said hull, said bulkhead structure having a bottom rising from its bow end to its stern end, said bottom being shaped to provide a longitudinal and inwardly

extending recess. The additional claims, to wit, 2, 3, and 4, contain all the provisions of claim 1 but specifically append thereto further limitations, as shown in the italicized portion of the claims. They are as follows:

(2) A marine vessel comprising a hull, and a longitudinal laterally extending exterior bulkhead structure thereon surrounding the bottom and part of the sides of said hull, said bulkhead structure having a bottom rising from its bow end to its stern end, said bottom being shaped to provide a longitudinal and inwardly extending recess, the bottom of said bulkhead structure merg

[ocr errors]

92 C. Cls. Reporter's Statement of the Case ing into the bottom region of the bow portion and the bottom region of the stern portion of said hull.

(3) A marine vessel comprising a hull, and a longitudinal laterally extending exterior bulkhead structure thereon surrounding the bottom and part of the sides of said hull, said bulkhead structure having a bottom rising from its bow end to its stern end, said bottom being shaped to provide a longitudinal and inwardly extend ing recess, the bottom of said hull being substantially flat throughout the midship body.

(4) A marine vessel comprising a hull, and a longitudinal laterally extending exterior bulkhead structure thereon surrounding the bottom and part of the sides of said hull, said bulkhead structure having a bottom rising from its bow end to its stern end, said bottom being shaped to provide a longitudinal and inwardly extending recess, said bulkhead structure extending over part

of the bow portion and the midship body of said hull. 8. Plaintiff in order to exemplify the various contours and shapes of the vessels here in controversy has introduced four physical models, as follows:

Model of plaintiff's patented vessel. (Plaintiff's Exhibit 40.)

Model of cross section of plaintiff's patent. (Plaintiff's Exhibit 41.)

Model of U. S. S. “Mississippi.” (Plaintiff's Exhibit 42.)

Model of cross section of U. S. S. “Mississippi.” (Plaintiff's exhibit 43.)

These models are by reference made a part of this finding.

9. Plaintiff's exhibit 41, “cross section of plaintiff's patent,” was built under the direction of plaintiff's expert witness and purports to show a cross section of the marine vessel shown at Fig. 7 of the patent in suit. There is no figure in the drawings of the patent or description in the specification that discloses the structure of this model. It is at best a development of the patent structure and does not follow the illustration of Fig. 7.

Plaintiff's Exhibit 8 consists of drawings showing the structure of the hulls of the battleships “Mississippi," "Idaho," and "New Mexico.” It is reproduced and inserted in these findings under the caption PLAINTIFF'S EX

316

Reporter's Statement of the Case

HIBIT 8. The structure shown is typical of that used by defendant, and the accuracy of these drawings is not disputed by either party.

9.99

Plaintiff's exhibit 43, purporting to show a cross section of U. S. S. "Mississippi" reproduced from plaintiff's exhibit 8, "outboard profile and deck plan of U. S. S. 'Mississippi,' does not conform to or truly represent the structure disclosed in plaintiff's exhibit 8.

Plaintiff's exhibit 8 does not show the internal construction of the hull sections, illustrated, namely sections at frames 24, 54, 70, and 118 and there is no satisfactory evidence of the inner construction of the hull in the record.

10. Infringement by the United States is charged because of the application of "blisters" or "bulges" to the battleships "Florida," "Utah," "Wyoming," "Arkansas," "New York," "Texas," "Oklahoma," "Pennsylvania," "Nevada," "Mississippi," "Idaho," and "New Mexico." The structures of these vessels are disclosed and illustrated by plaintiff's exhibits Nos. 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, and are by reference made a part of this finding.

"BLISTERS" OR "BULGES"

11. The term "bulge" or "blister" as used in connection with protection to the sides of the hull from torpedo attacks, so far as the record shows, appears about the date of the commencement of the World War.

In a publication entitled "Naval Construction During The War," read at the Sixtieth Session of Naval Architects, April 9, 1919, Sir Eustace Tennyson d'Eyncourt, K. C. B., stated in describing the construction of battleships of the "Royal Sovereign" Class of 1913-1914, page 4, defendant's exhibit No. 12: "The vessel was provided with good underwater protection, which in certain of the ships was further reinforced by adding outside 'bulges.' This was done to 'Ramillies' before her launch and also to two other vessels of the class after they had been in commission some time, during refit, and it is proposed to add the bulge to the remaining two ships of the class when opportunity appears.

291825-41-CC-vol. 92– -23

« PreviousContinue »