Login
  • Bookmark
  • PDF
  • Share
  • CaseIQ

HOUGHTON v. OOMS

United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit.
Jun 3, 1946
Judgment
Subsequent
References
CaseIQ
Case Information
CITATION CODES

155 F.2d 745

DOCKET NO.

No. 9147.

ATTORNEY(S)

Mr. David Rines, of Boston, Mass., with whom Mr. Frank W. Dahn, of Washington, D.C., was on the brief, for appellant. Mr. E.L. Reynolds, of Washington, D.C., with whom Mr. W.W. Cochran, Solicitor, United States Patent Office, of Washington, D.C., was on the brief, for appellee.

JUDGES

Henry White Edgerton

Bennett Champ Clark

Wilbur Kingsbury Miller

ACTS

No Acts

See more information ... Less ...

PER CURIAM.

This is a suit under R.S. § 4915, 35 U.S.C. § 63, 35 U.S.C.A. § 63, to obtain a patent. The record supports the District Court's findings that the claims do not distinguish over the prior art except in terms of function, General Electric Co. v. Wabash Appliance Corp., 304 U.S. 364, 58 S.Ct. 899, 82 L.Ed. 1402, Minnesota Mining Mfg. Co. v. Coe, 72 App.D C. 183, 113 F.2d 512, and that the claims do not define an invention. The judgment dismissing the complaint is therefore affirmed.

© 2023 Gauge Data Solutions Pvt. Ltd.

x

Alert

Please log in or sign up for a free trial to access this feature.
Sign Up Login
x