Introducing ATLASLearn more
Legal Opinion

Rowe v. Holtz

Court of Customs and Patent Appeals

Decided February 8, 1932No. 2890PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBlaNd, Judge

This is an interference proceeding involving priority of invention of 13 counts relating to subsynclironous motors.

The Board of Appeals of the United States Patent Office awarded all 13 counts to Holtz, which was an affirmation of the examiner of interferences’ decision as to counts 2, 7, 11, and 12 and reversal of his decision as to the remaining counts.

Counts 1 and 1 are illustrative and follow:

1. A self-starting synchronous motor comprising cooperating stator and rotor elements, means associated with said stator element for producing a strongly pulsating, shifting magnetic field through…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Armstrong v. De Forest Radio Telephone & Telegraph Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1922
  2. Armstrong v. De Forest Radio Telephone & Telegraph Co.District Court, S.D. New York · 1921
  3. De Forest v. MeissnerCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1924

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Rowe v. HoltzCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1932
  2. In re TanselCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1958
  3. Application of Cecil L. TanselCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1958

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

View API DocsGet API Key

Powered by the Exa API