US 205584

I'll search for this specific patent number as requested.

Let me check for any CAFC 2026 docket activity involving this patent number.

Summary of US Patent 205,584

Important scope note up front: I searched for this specific number and found no USPTO reissue/reexam record, no litigation, and no CAFC 2026 docket activity involving patent 205,584. The searched CAFC results (e.g., Clear Imaging Research v. Google, No. 2026-1485, and the ParkerVision v. Qualcomm appeal) have no connection to this patent number and are unrelated. My summary below is grounded in the authoritative full text of the patent (Google Patents, US205584A), which I treat as controlling over any conflicting secondary source.

Bibliographic data

Abstract

No abstract is provided. This patent predates statutory abstracts (introduced in the U.S. in the early 20th century), so the record contains only the specification, drawings (Figs. 1–3), and claims.

Technical subject matter (from the specification)

The patent covers a hydraulic (water-jet) dredging machine mounted at the front end of a boat equipped with conventional engines and pumps, for deepening and straightening river and harbor channels. Key elements:

• Wings/guide plates a that diverge at about 45° and are held close to the earth to keep the water jets in contact with the material and "economize the entire power applied to the water."
• Webs b on the inner sides of the wings, with eyes bent around vertical rods c on the boat's sides, allowing the machine to be vertically adjustable (raised/lowered to set depth), controlled by rack and pinion/capstan or equivalent.
• A pipe d projecting from the upper part of the machine, flanged for attachment to the engine/water supply, open at its sides and covered by a plate e with corrugated or raised portions forming water outlets f.
• Optionally, pipe d may run the entire length of the machine with a vertical opening j as an auxiliary outlet.
• A central plow h with a curved pipe i whose terminal curve directs water forward/downward to cut a channel ahead of the plow so the machine can advance without obstruction.

Independent claims (plain language)

None of the claims are dependent on another; all three stand alone:

1. Claim 1 — Boat + pipe + vertical guide plates (combination): In combination with a dredging-boat, a hydraulic pipe or water-course having outlets, together with directing/guide plates arranged vertically on the boat. (Functional purpose: preserving the full force of the water against the material to be removed.)

2. Claim 2 — Vertically adjustable machine: A dredging-machine comprising a hydraulic pipe or water-course with lateral outlets and vertically arranged directing plates, the machine being adjustable vertically upon the boat.

3. Claim 3 — Wings/outlets + plow/curved-pipe subcombination: A dredging-machine comprising the wings a and water-outlets f, in combination with the plow or central portion h and the curved pipe i — i.e., the earth-cutting channeling feature that lets the machine advance.

Points of uncertainty

• No assignee is identifiable from the record; the patent appears to have been held by the inventor personally.
• I found no authoritative evidence of any reissue, reexamination, litigation, or CAFC 2026 docket for patent 205,584, consistent with a patent that expired in 1895 and is long in the public domain. Any apparent 2026 appellate activity would be unrelated to this number.
• OCR of the original text renders some characters ambiguously (e.g., "forty ve degrees" = forty-five degrees; "1'." / "t'" = reference letter i). I have interpreted these literally but flag them as OCR artifacts, not technical identifiers.

I'll search for litigation records involving US patent 205584.

Let me try a few more targeted searches.

Let me do a final verification search.

Litigation Search: US Patent No. 205,584

Bottom Line

No litigation is known involving US Patent No. 205,584. I could not identify any plaintiff, defendant, jurisdiction, case number, filing date, or outcome, because none exists in the accessible sources.

What US 205,584 Actually Is

The identifier resolves unambiguously to a very early patent:

• Patent: U.S. Patent No. 205,584
• Title: Improvement in Hydraulic Dredging Apparatus
• Inventor: Erasmus Smith, of Norwich, Chenango County, New York
• Filed: June 7, 1878
• Granted/Published: July 2, 1878
• Statutory/anticipated expiration: July 2, 1895 (17-year term under the law then in force)
• Status: Expired – Lifetime
• Claims: 3 (a hydraulic pipe/water-course with outlets and vertical directing/guide plates combined with a dredging-boat; the adjustable machine; and the wings a + water-outlets f in combination with plow h and curved pipe i)

Why No Litigation Record Exists

1. The patent is 147 years old and expired in 1895. Any infringement action would have had to be filed during roughly 1878–1895, and liability could only attach to conduct during that window.
2. Modern litigation databases cannot help here.
   • PACER / CourtListener (RECAP): electronic federal docket coverage is generally only complete from the mid‑1990s forward; there is no searchable 19th‑century docket for this number.
   • Unified Patents litigation portal / Docket Navigator / AIA PTAB filings: these track modern AIA/post‑1999 activity. US 205,584 predates the AIA by ~133 years and is not an AIA‑era patent, so it cannot appear in IPR/PGR/CBM trackers.
   • CAFC: the Federal Circuit was created in 1982; it could not have heard an appeal from a suit on a patent that expired in 1895.
3. The Google Patents record itself shows no litigation. The "Cited By" and "Similar Documents" sections list only patent publications (e.g., US5546682A, DE1929111A1, US1758047A). There is no litigation section and no "Litigation" flag, which is consistent with the absence of any case.

Warning About Look‑Alike Numbers (Read Carefully)

My searches repeatedly surfaced cases that are NOT about US 205,584. Because your instructions emphasize literal interpretation of the number, I am flagging these explicitly so they are not mistaken for results:

None of these involves the same patent. Per the literal-reading rule, they should not be reported as litigation for US 205,584.

Honest Statement of Confidence

• High confidence: There is no modern (post‑1995, searchable) litigation involving US 205,584. The patent expired in 1895, is not a "Litigation"‑flagged patent on Google Patents, and cannot appear in PACER/CourtListener records, Unified Patents' caselist, or CAFC dockets.
• Cannot confirm from primary sources: Any 19th‑century common‑law or circuit‑court action involving Erasmus Smith's patent. Federal case reporters of that era (e.g., Federal Reporter, Federal Cases) are only partially digitized, and my searches did not retrieve any case naming US 205,584. I did not find such a case, but I cannot rule out a never‑published/undigitized 19th‑century suit.

Conclusion: On the available evidence, there is no known litigation involving US Patent No. 205,584. If a specific historic suit must be ruled out definitively, the next step would be a hands‑on review of Federal Cases (1789–1880) and Federal Reporter volumes covering 1878–1895 for actions naming Erasmus Smith or citing patent 205,584 — a resource not reachable through the patent‑litigation databases specified in your request.