[QUOTE=Mister Moon;22923][B][SIZE="4"]U.S. Patent 4,458,420 Shear pin hilt for knife
Abstract
An impact-resistant knife hilt comprising a hollow handle containing a clevis with shear pin connecting the knife blade to a bolt passing through the end cap of the knife handle. Such a knife is readily assembled and disassembled by tightening or removing the bolt while the hilt with shear pin reduces the risk of blade breakage upon their impact.
"Having thus described the preferred embodiments with a certain degree of particularity, it is manifest that many changes can be made in the details of construction, arrangement, and fabrication of the elements and their uses without departing from the spirit and scope of this invention. Therefore, it is to be understood that the invention is not limited to the embodiment set forth herein for purposes of exemplification...." (Language from Patent 4,458,420)
The exact idea approved by the Patent Office is not limited to the drawing(s) or abstract, but is expressed by EVERYTHING the document says. To prove infringement requires the entire description be applied to a fully assembled M-9 hilt, which is subject to destructive scientific testing. When that is properly done, claim #1 fully applies to M-9 hilt operation. This result combines with modularity (assembly/disassembly) within and about the same hilt which also provides repairable, selective metal shear. Exactly who had the idea first, and first approached the original manufacturer and U.S. Army, also constitutes lawful evidence of infringement. EVERY SINGLE BIT OF THIS WELL KNOWN PROCEDURE WAS AVOIDED BY THE U. S. ARMY.
Thank you for an opportunity to share my experience with the M-9 Multipurpose Bayonet System.
Last edited by Kurtis Dwight Davis; 08-23-2011 at 09:13 PM.
|