Rider v. Griffith
Court of Customs and Patent Appeals
1Opinion of the CourtBlaNd, Judge
This is an appeal by the senior party, Rider, from a decision of the Board of Interference Examiners of the United States Patent Office in which priority of the invention defined by six counts was awarded to the junior party, Griffith.
The issue with which we are here concerned is originality. Rider, in his brief, states:
The issue is originality. Rider charges that Griffith derived the invention from him, through one E. A. Lowe and/or S. T. Van Houten, while the latter and Rider were employed by The Automatic Sprinkler Company of America. Hence, Rider being the original and first inventor,…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Asbach v. Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railway Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1888
- Goodnow v. BurrowsSupreme Court of Iowa · 1885
- Fersing v. FastCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1941
3Cited by5 opinions
- Hedgewick v. AkersCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1974
- Anderson v. AndersonDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 1975
- Mortsell v. LaurilaCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1962
- Radio Corporation of America v. Philco CorporationDistrict Court, D. New Jersey · 1967
- Mortsell v. LaurilaCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1962