WISNER V. GRANT. 485 �preservation of its rights that it he successively represented in the same defences by all. The want of an answer by the new board bas not, so far as is made to appear, afiected the issues. The decision bas not been made at all upon the bill not answered, as if it bad been taken pro confessa, nor upon anything but the proofs applicable to the iesues. No injus- tice bas resulted from the course taken, so farasisseen, and none appears likely to result if the pleadings remain as they are. �The motion is granted, and the answer ordered to be taken off the file. lioiE. See Munson v. The Mayor, 3 Fed. Rep. 338. ���WiSNEB and others v. Geant and others. (Circuit Court, N. D. New York. February 5, 1880.) �1. Patent No. 69,713, for horse hay rakes, granted to Joseph H. Shire- �man October 8, 1867, and re-issued to James B. Wisner December 11, 1877, construed, and fourth, flfth, and sixth claims sustained. �2. Patent— CoMBiKATioN— Invention. �A combination of parts never before combined does not necessarily involve invention, as where a well-known contrivance is used to per- forai a function exactly analogous to that in which it was formerly used ; but where such combination produces a new mode of opera- tion and a more efficient machine, and the conception of which in- volved thought and intellect, it implies invention. �In Equity. �L. Hill, for complainants. �C. M. Peck, for defendants. �Wallacb, D. J. I am precluded, by the urgent demanda upon my time at present, from doing more than briefly stat- ing my conclusions in this case. Shireman, in bis patent of 1867, discloses the first invention in which the entire power of both carrying wheels is utilized at the middle of the rake head in the tilting operation of the horse rake. The power of a constantly revolving axle, driven by both carrying wheels, had been applied at the middle of the axle to communieate ��� �
