Legal Opinion

Krause v. Coe

Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit

Decided May 5, 1941No. 7584PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

VINSON, Associate Justice.

Appellant brought this action, commonly known as a 4915 proceeding,1 in the District Court, to authorize and compel the Commissioner to grant a patent. Previously, the Examiner and the Board of Appeals in the Patent Office had decided that appellant’s claims were unpatentable inasmuch as they lacked invention in view of prior and patented art. The District Court likewise found appellant’s claims to be unpatentable, and dismissed the complaint.

Appellant’s claims are in the field of flush valves. The description and operation of the valve, while not restricted to use…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Lincoln Engineering Co. v. Stewart-Warner Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1938
  2. Abbott v. CoeCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1939

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Standard Oil Development Co. v. Marzall, Commissioner of PatentsCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1950
  2. Sherwin-Williams Co. v. Marzall, Commissioner of PatentsCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1951
  3. Standard Cap & Seal Corp. v. CoeCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1941
  4. Frick-Gallagher Mfg. Co. v. Rotray Corp.Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1941
  5. Spialter v. MarzallDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 1951

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API