Coe v. Hobart Mfg. Co.
Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
1Opinion of the Court
EDGERTON, Associate Justice.
• ,-cc ix. -tt t. *. »r , , - Plaintiff, the Hobart Manufacturing Company, filed a bill in equity in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, ostensibly under Tit. 35,'§.63, of the U.S. Code, 35 U.S.C.A. § 63 (R.S. § 4915), against Conway P. Coe, Commissioner of Patents, and Vincent W. Cunningham. The bill prayed that plaintiff and not Cunningham be adjudged entitled to a patent for improvements in a washing machine. It showed that the Patent Office had held interference proceedings, in which Cunningham’s right to make the claims in suit had…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Armstrong v. LangmuirCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1925
- Hazeltine Corporation v. WhiteCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1934
- Armstrong v. De ForestCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1926
- Drackett Co. v. Chamberlain Co.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1936
- Melling v. Gordon Form Lathe Co.District Court, N.D. Ohio · 1926
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by18 opinions
- Radtke Patents Corporation v. CoeCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1941
- Speed Products. Co., Inc. v. Tinnerman Products, Inc.Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1948
- Tomlinson of High Point v. CoeCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1941
- Henry L. Hayes v. Frank W. LivermontCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1960
- Continental Distilling Corporation v. Old Charter Distillery Co.Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1950
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.