Legal Opinion
Bayer v. Rice
Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
Decided December 24, 1934No. 6140, 6141, 6285, 6286PublishedCited by 16 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ROBB, Associate Justice.
These are proceedings under section 4915, R. S., as amended (35 USCA § 63), instituted in the Supreme Court of the District for the purpose of obtaining letters patent for the process of making a “cellular cement” as expressed in a single count as follows: “The process of forming a cellular cement which comprises forming a tenacious foam and mixing the foam with a cement.”
Rice’s application was filed December 21, 1922, and has been assigned to the Bubble-stone Company, a corporation.. Bayer, a' resident of Denmark, filed an application in the United States Patent…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Morgan v. DanielsSupreme Court of the United States · 1894
- Radio Corp. of America v. Radio Engineering Laboratories, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1934
- Alexander Milburn Co. v. Davis-Bournonville Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1926
- American Fire Insurance v. LandfareNebraska Supreme Court · 1898
- Roemer v. NeumannSupreme Court of the United States · 1889
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by16 opinions
- Abbott v. CoeCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1939
- Radtke Patents Corporation v. CoeCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1941
- General Talking Pictures Corp. v. American Triergon Corp.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1938
- Daniels v. CoeCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1940
- Application of William L. Tenney, Paul A. Frank and Scoville E. KnoxCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1958
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.