PER CURIAM.
In his petition for rehearing appellant has cited Kellogg No. 657,777, Hill No. 1,338,773, and Segelhorst No. 1,599,067 and No. 1,767,018 as being demonstrative of anticipation of Reilly-Stone No. 1,625,391. We do not find in these patents such anticipation. The petition for rehearing is denied.
MATHEWS, Circuit Judge dissents.