HO FEDERAL REPORTER. �or non-elastic webbing, provided at each end, and an automatic clasping device applied to the sleeve in the direction of its length, substontially as described and shown. (2) As a new article of manufacture a sleeve supporter, consist- ing of the strap, B, provided at its ends with the clamping jaws, A A, all combined and adapted for use substantially as described." �The plaintiff, after making one of these supporters in January or Feb- ruary, 1874, showed it to other persons and illustrated its use at that time, and used it himself satisf actorily in Marcti or April, 1874. He made a second supporter of the same structure in September, 1 874, as a model for an application for a patent. His application was filed in the patent-office, complete, October 28, 1874. The specification was sworn to October 20, 1874. The drawings were substantially the same as those in No. 202,735, and the description was to the same effect. The claim was substantially like claim 2 of No. 202,735. The spring closes the jaws, and they are opened by pushing the tails of the jaws towards each other against the action of the spring, the tail of the lower jaw projecting downward. This application was rejected November 9, 1874, on the ground that it did not involve invention, in view of No. 156,429, and of a patent to Langford and one to Bough- ton. On December 26, 1874, amendments were filed — one, to obvi- ate the Boughton patent, disclaimed a supporter eonsisting of an elastic strap andtwo hooked plates fixedto its ends, the hooks "being to enter a garment ;" another disclaimed either of the clasps separate from the strap. The amendments were considered, and on January 2, 1875, the application was again rejected, in view of the same refer- ences. Nothing more was done till April, 1878. �On the ninth of April, 1878, a new application was filed, complete, with a new petition, oath, specification, drawing, and model, and a new fee. The oath was made April 5, 1878. On the eleventh of April, 1878, the application was rejected as being "found to be lack- ing in patentable novelty, in view of the state of the art," because the clasp was old, as seen in No. 156,429, and because "suspending straps, composed of an elastic band, with a clasp, buckle, or other adjusting device on each end, are also old, and therefore, in the present instance, the alleged invention is but the mere substitution of one old clasp in the place of another upon the ends of the strap, and is not deemed an invention. " Keference was made, in the letter of rejection, io patent No. 88,984, to Eobbins, and to patents to Gibbons, Church, and Eames, and Philbrook. On the eleventh of April, 1878, after said rejection,amendments were made making the specification and claims exactly as they are in No. 202,735. The application was rejected ��� �
