Legal Opinion
Minnesota Mining & Mfg. Co. v. Coe
Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
Decided December 30, 1940No. Nos. 7539-7541PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
EDGERTON, Associate Justice.
The Patent Office rejected for lack of invention certain patent claims for improvements in making flexible abrasives known as sandpaper. In suits brought by appellant under § 4915, R. S.,1 the District Court found that the claims now in issue were not patentable over the prior art.2
*594These claims are for abrasive sheets or belts, made up of a backing and an abrasive grit bonded to it. The gist of the claims is that they disclose vinyl resins as a binder. The Patent Office concedes the novelty and utility of such binders. The evidence tends to show that they impart…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Consolidated Edison Co. v. National Labor Relations BoardSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
- Schriber-Schroth Co. v. Cleveland Trust Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1940
- Abbott v. CoeCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1939
- Kurtz v. Belle Hat Lining Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1922
- Textile MacHine Works v. Louis Hirsch Textile MacHines, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1938
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- United States v. Dennis E. PrybaCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1974
- United States v. Willie Bell, (Two Cases)Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1974
- Standard Oil Development Co. v. Marzall, Commissioner of PatentsCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1950
- Randall E. Sebold, Sr. v. Irene H. SeboldCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1971
- United States v. Earlie Edmonds, Jr., Also Known as Earlie Edmund, Jr.Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1975
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.