An  inventor  of  a  design  for  buttons  manufactured  such  buttons,
and  put  them  upon  the  market  two  or  three  months  before  he
applied  for  a  patent  for  the  design.  It  was  held,  that  the  question
whether  his  doing  so  was  an  abandonment  of  his  design,  was  a
question  of  intention,  to  be  determined  as  a  question  of  fact,  on  a
trial  at  law  ;  and  that  a  preliminary  injunction  might  well  be  with-
held until  such  trial  should  be  had.     lb.
Billiard  tables  with  beveled  ends  are  old  ;  hence  a  design  for  a
billiard  table,  having  a  greater  bevel  than  has  heretofore  been
used,  is  void,  as  not  involving  any  sufficient  invention  or  discovery.
Collender  «.  Griffith,  11  Blatclif.  212  ;  .S  Pat.  Off.  Gaz.  630.  See
Collender  v.  Griffith,  18  Blatchf.  110.
A  combination  or  aggregation  of  old  designs  producing  no  new
appearance,  is  not  patentable  ;  thus  a  design  patent  for  a  rectangu-
lar provision-safe,  was  held  invalid,  the  only  originality  consisting
in  the  use  of  two  vertical  panels  in  each  wall,  and  a  familiar
moulding  around  the  top  and  bottom.  Northrup  v.  Adams,  12
Fat.  Off.  Gaz.  430  ;  2  Bonn.  &  A.  Pat.  Gas.  567.
A  design  patent  is  valid  when  the  specification  and  claim  refer
for  the  entire  description  of  the  design  to  a  photographic  illustra-
tion accompanying  the  specification.  Dobson  v.  Dorman,  35  Pat.
Off.   Gun.  150  ;  6  iSitp.   Ct.  Bepr,  946.
But  where  the  prominent  claim  in  a  design  patent  is  necessarily
for  figures  in  relief,  a  photograph  of  the  design,  since  it  does  not
show  the  relief,  fails  to  sufficiently  describe  the  design,  in  the
absence  of  a  minute  description  in  the  specification.  Untermeyer
V.  Jeannot,  20  Fed.  Rep''r,  5  03.
