Kauzal v Lee [1936] HCA 39

Kauzal v Lee [1936] HCA 39 - HCA 1936 case summary — Zoe

[14]

structed according to my present invention. Fig. 2 is a side elevation of the control valve mechanism employed therein. Fig. 3 is a plan view, and Fig. 4 a central longitudinal section of the control valve mechanism. Fig. 5 is a sectional elevation showing in enlarged scale the preferred construction of the nozzle attached to the end of the barrel of the control valve mechanism. Fig. 6 is an enlarged perspective view of the rotatable stop pin used to limit the travel of the control valve plunger when it is desired to administer a reduced quantity of the drench. The reservoir 6 has a curved rear wall 7 adapted to comfortably fit against the chest of the operator and is provided with shoulder straps 8. A liquid level indicator comprising a glass tube 9 held in a hollow rod 10 is fitted in a recess 11 in the wall of the reservoir. The lower end of the rod 10 is in communication with the reservoir and its upper end protrudes through cover 12 and is fitted with a screw cap 13 having an air vent therein. The cover of the reservoir has a filling hole closable by a screw cap 14 also provided with an air vent. At the foot of the reservoir there is a cock 15 with right and left hand nipples 16 to which a flexible tube 17, communicating with the trigger-operated control valve mechanism 18, may be connected to suit individual operators. The control valve mechanism 18 is in the form of a pistol and has a detachable barrel 19 in which a plunger 20, secured to a stem 21, is adapted to be operated by pressure on a trigger 22. The said trigger has a radial arm 23 formed integral with it ; and this arm is connected to the plunger stem 21 through a link 24. A collar 40 mounted on the valve stem 21 normally abuts a gland 25 which is locked by a nut 27 and which serves as an adjustable stop whereby the travel of the plunger may be slightly varied. When it is desired to substantially reduce the quantity of drench ejected from the control valve mechanism at each operation a rotatable stop pin or stud 39 (see fig. 6) may be secured to the stock of the valve so as to limit the travel of the plunger 20 to the desired extent. This pin has a cam-faced collar 41 fast on it adapted to engage with cam 42 secured to the inner face of the control valve casing. A spring 43 (see fig. 3) normally holds the cam faces in contact but, on part rotation of thumb piece 44, the end of the pin 39 may be advanced into the path of the radial member 23 thereby forming a stop to limit backward travel of the plunger, as indicated in fig. 4. Alternatively a shorter barrel may be secured to the valve casing. The outer end of the valve barrel 19 has a nozzle 28 screwed

[15]

thereon and if desired locked by set screws 29 (see fig. 5). Said nozzle houses an inlet valve 30 and a discharge valve 31, both loaded with helical springs 32. The inlet valve controls passage 33 in communication with nipple 34 to which the flexible tube 17 from the reservoir 6 is connected, and the discharge valve 31 controls passage 35 which has in its outer end screwed socket 36 carrying a comparatively long curved tubular extension 37 of small bore. a washer 38 being interposed to seal the joint. In cases where viscous fluids are used a valve may be provided in the reservoir to regulate a supply of air under pressure to assist in forcing the fluid to the barrel 19. Having now fully described and ascertained my said invention and the manner in which it is to be performed, I declare that what I claim is: - 1. Improvements in drenchers for sheep and other cattle characterized by a reservoir adapted to be suspended from the shoulders of the operator, and the hand-controlled valve mechanism in the form of a pistol connected to the reservoir by suitable tubing. 2. In drenchers for sheep and other stock of the kind described, a portable reservoir having shoulder straps fastened thereto and having a liquid level indicator, a filling orifice, and a draw-off cock at its base for the purpose explained. 3. In drenchers for sheep and other stock of the kind described, a hand- controlled valve mechanism having a detachable barrel, a nozzle housing inlet and discharge valves. and provided with a nipple for connection to the reservoir, and a plunger in said barrel actuated by a trigger and adapted to draw a predetermined quantity of the drench into the barrel and force it therefrom through said nozzle. 4. In drenchers for sheep and other stock of the kind described, a portable reservoir substantially as herein described and as illus- trated in fig. 1 of the accompanying drawings. 5. In drenchers for sheep and other stock of the kind described, a hand-controlled valve mechanism substantially as herein described and as illustrated in the accompanying drawings. 6. Improvements in drenchers for sheep and other stock of the kind described, consisting in the combination of a portable reservoir with a hand-controlled valve mechanism in communication with said reservoir for the purpose explained, substantially as herein described and as illustrated in the accompanying drawings."

[36]

The respondent made six claims, but only two were relied upon at the hearing of the action, namely, the third and the fifth. Claim 3 was as follows : - 'In drenchers for sheep and other stock of the kind described, a hand-controlled valve mechanism having a detach- able barrel, a nozzle housing inlet and discharge valves, and provided with a nipple for connection to the reservoir, and a plunger in said barrel actuated by a trigger and adapted to draw a predetermined quantity of the drench into the barrel and force it therefrom through said nozzle." Now claim 3, it must be observed, limits the applica- tion of the invention to drenchers for sheep and other stock of the kind described in the specification (See Morris and Bastert v. Young (1) ). But it is said that the claim is vague and ambiguous. Taken with the specification, a drencher of the kind described is one with a reservoir with a valve at the foot thereof connected by flexible or other tubing to a control valve mechanism adapted to draw the drench into a detachable barrel. The elements of the hand-con- trolled valve mechanism are then set forth. The main features of the mechanism are concisely stated in the claim, and are plain enough when read in conjunction with the specification of which they form part. But the words in claim 3, "and adapted to draw a predeter- mined quantity of the drench into the barrel and force it therefrom through said nozzle," occasion some difficulty. It is not important, I think, whether these words attach to "a hand-controlled valve mechanism " or to "a plunger in said barrel actuated by a trigger." But how is the mechanism or plunger adapted? And in what manner and by whom is the quantity of the drench predetermined / The specification itself contemplates barrels of different capacities in the mechanism. The specification and the claim rather point, I think, to the user determining the dose, and the specification contains and describes a mechanical contrivance whereby he can so predetermine it. The claim is not limited to that contrivance, but

At a glance

Court

Decision date

Before

Source

Judgment (78 paragraphs)

accompanied by drawings. A material claim in the specification was: "In

Cited By (2)