AMBROSE v. MARZALL

Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Report a problem

Citation Codes

Equivalent Citations

citation codes

Docket Number

No. 10018.

Attorney(S)

Mr. Alva D. Adams, Washington, D.C., with whom Mr. Stone E. Bush, Washington, D.C., was on the brief, for appellants. Mr. Joseph Schimmel, Washington, D.C., with whom Mr. W.W. Cochran, as Solicitor, United States Patent Office, Washington, D.C., was on the brief, for appellee. Mr. E.L. Reynolds, Washington, D.C., also entered an appearance for appellee.

Judges

Henry White Edgerton
Elijah Barrett Prettyman
George Thomas Washington

Are you a practicing lawyer?

Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.

Upload pleading to use the new AI search

Click here to upload

Cites

Citation Codes

Equivalent Citations

citation codes

Docket Number

No. 10018.

Attorney(S)

Mr. Alva D. Adams, Washington, D.C., with whom Mr. Stone E. Bush, Washington, D.C., was on the brief, for appellants. Mr. Joseph Schimmel, Washington, D.C., with whom Mr. W.W. Cochran, as Solicitor, United States Patent Office, Washington, D.C., was on the brief, for appellee. Mr. E.L. Reynolds, Washington, D.C., also entered an appearance for appellee.

Judges

Henry White Edgerton
Elijah Barrett Prettyman
George Thomas Washington

See more information ...

Smart Summary

Please sign up to generate summary.

Paul M. AMBROSE and Crimora Research and De v. lopment Corporation, Appellants,

PER CURIAM.

This appeal is from a judgment for the defendant Commissioner of Patents in a suit under R.S. § 4915, 35 U.S.C.A. § 63, to obtain reissue of a patent with added claims. Quite apart from any question of estoppel, there was no substantial evidence of the "inadvertence, accident, or mistake" required by R.S. § 4916, 35 U.S.C.A. § 64. We express no opinion regarding the District Court's ruling that the appellant was, as a matter of law, estopped to make the added claims.

Affirmed.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Try AI Pro free for 7 days Upgrade to AI Pro

Paul M. AMBROSE and Crimora Research and De v. lopment Corporation, Appellants,

Comments