Legal Opinion
Oldroyd v. Morgan
Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
Decided March 5, 1928No. Nos. 2018, 2019PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MARTIN, Chief Justice.
These are interference proceedings. The appeals have been submitted together, but appeal No. 2018 will be taken up first.
The invention relates to coal-mining machinery, and the issue is defined by a single count, which reads as follows:
“Count. In a machine of the nature described, the combination of a body tumable horizontally, means for turning said body, a tool rotatable on a horizontal axis, mechanism for effecting rotation of said support, a cutting tool, members supporting said tool on said support for movement toward and from the axial line of said support, means…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Leonard v. EverettCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1922
- Ruth v. GrochCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1922
- Blaine v. WhiteDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 1920
3Cited by6 opinions
- Abbott v. CoeCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1939
- Robbins v. SteinbartCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1932
- Carbide & Carbon Chemicals Corporation v. CoeCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1938
- Carbide & Carbon Chemicals Corporation v. CoeCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1938
- Stern v. SchroederCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1929
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.