Dating a Stanley No. 36 level

[MarkMcC]

Sure have enjoyed cruising this site! I think I have determined this is a 12" Stanley No. 36G cast iron level and have seen versions of it in many old Stanley catalogs but I am wondering what years this version was made? It seems there were subtle changes over the years. Thank you in advance for any help you can provide! Mark

 

[crguy]

Stanley made those for many years. I can tell you they came with rotating vial covers starting in 1935.

 

[MarkMcC]

Good to know - thank you!

 

[RTM]

The level was made from 1898 to 1977, as crguy noted, the rotating cover came out in 1935. In the 1930s, the vials were adjusted by a single screw. From 1947 - 49, and extra heavy rib on the inside of the casting. Mentions various casting styles, but no details, throughout the tools life

John Walter's 1999 Stanley tool bible

 

[MarkMcC]

Thanks again RTM. I sure appreciate how how the members here share their expertise.

 

[rms911]

I have a No 36 with patent dates cast into the body, in addition to "STANLEY" and "No 36". It doesn't have rotating covers on the vials, so it is prior to 1935. Any way to date it further? I would assume with these patent dates cast, it was an earlier model.

 

[RTM]

Should be no older than 17 years after the first patent, and no newer than the newest patent date.

 

[4xdog]

Should be no older than 17 years after the first patent, and no newer than the newest patent date.

Yes on the latest patent date part, but I'm not sure a company would have changed their tooling as soon as the original patent expired. It could easily have been made after that, simply showing a patent that was no longer in force.

 

[RTM]

Yes on the latest patent date part, but I'm not sure a company would have changed their tooling as soon as the original patent expired. It could easily have been made after that, simply showing a patent that was no longer in force.

Was actually illegal to display an expired patent. Recent Solo cup case made it apparent it’s still in effect.

Pequignot v. Solo Cup Company: Federal Circuit Holds That False Marking Statute Applies to Marking With Expired Patents, But Affirms Summary Judgment That Manufacturer Lacked Intent to Deceive the Public

The Federal Circuit held in Pequignot v. Solo Cup Co. , No. 2009-1547 (June 10, 2010), that the false marking statute, 35 U.S.C. § 292, applies to products marked with expired patents, although the pr...

www.perkinscoie.com

 

[4xdog]

Was actually illegal to display an expired patent. Recent Solo cup case made it apparent it’s still in effect.

Pequignot v. Solo Cup Company: Federal Circuit Holds That False Marking Statute Applies to Marking With Expired Patents, But Affirms Summary Judgment That Manufacturer Lacked Intent to Deceive the Public

The Federal Circuit held in Pequignot v. Solo Cup Co. , No. 2009-1547 (June 10, 2010), that the false marking statute, 35 U.S.C. § 292, applies to products marked with expired patents, although the pr...

www.perkinscoie.com

Good reference, and most interesting. Seems logical that Solo received a summary judgement that there was no intent to deceive in leaving an expired patent number in their tooling.

That original act was passed in 1952, I believe. Was there anything governing expired patents prior to that, I wonder — possibly in the period when the level was made?

 

[RTM]

Good reference, and most interesting. Seems logical that Solo received a summary judgement that there was no intent to deceive in leaving an expired patent number in their tooling.

That original act was passed in 1952, I believe. Was there anything governing expired patents prior to that, I wonder — possibly in the period when the level was made?

My understanding (flawed tho it may be) was that patent numbers had to be removed after expiry long before 1952. Maybe they just codified it more at that point. Too tired to read legalese at this time of night. Maybe more later.

 

[RTM]

Good reference, and most interesting. Seems logical that Solo received a summary judgement that there was no intent to deceive in leaving an expired patent number in their tooling.

That original act was passed in 1952, I believe. Was there anything governing expired patents prior to that, I wonder — possibly in the period when the level was made?

Here is a link discussing it, if the link breaks, it is footnote 4 on printed page 271, basically saying



The patentee has no right to mark his item Patented after the patent has expired, per section 4900, of some unknown document.

The Law of Patents for Useful Inventions

books.google.com

The Law of Patents for Useful Inventions
Volume 2
By William Callyhan Robinson · 1890