Legal Opinion
Gustav Schafer v. Robert C. Watson, Commissioner of Patents, Herbert Bestian v. Robert C. Watson, Commissioner of Patents
Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
Decided February 9, 1961No. 16009, 16010PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Per curiam
The Patent Office having rejected certain patent claims of the appellants as unpatentable over the prior art, appellants brought these suits against the Commissioner of Patents under 66 Stat. 803, 35 U.S.C. § 145. The District Court held a hearing, agreed with the Patent Office that the claims were not inventive, and dismissed the complaints.
“Although a court, when it agrees with a Patent Office finding, often says so, agreement is not necessary to affirmance and disagreement is not sufficient for reversal.” Abbott v. Coe, 71 App.D.C. 195, 197, 109 F.2d 449, 451. “Since invention is a…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Abbott v. CoeCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1939
- Esso Standard Oil Company v. Sun Oil CompanyCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1956
- Besser v. OomsCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1946
3Cited by8 opinions
- The Maytag Company, a Corporation v. The Murray Corporation of America, a CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1963
- Edwid E. Hays and Wallace & Tiernan, Inc. v. Edward J. Brenner, Commissioner of PatentsCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1966
- Edwin L. Reynolds, Acting Commissioner of Patents v. Elie P. AghnidesCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1966
- Goodyear Tire and Rubber Company v. David L. Ladd, Commissioner of PatentsCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1965
- Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. v. LaddDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 1963
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.