Legal Opinion

American Cyanamid Co. v. Marzall

Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit

Decided March 13, 1952No. 11096_1PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Per curiam

Froth flotation was well known to the prior art. This is not disputed. The appellant’s assignors put froth flotation to practical and successful use in the elimination of contaminants or solid particles from lubricating and cooling emulsions, called lubricating or emulsion coolants. The District Court in an action filed by-appellant pursuant to Rev.Stat. § 4915 (1878), as amended, 35 U.S.C.A. § 63, found that the discovery of this new usefulness of froth flotation did not amount to patentable invention and dismissed the action. The effect was to leave undisturbed the Patent Office decision…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. General Electric Co. v. Jewel Incandescent Lamp Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1945
  2. Lovell Manufacturing Co. v. CarySupreme Court of the United States · 1893

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Beck v. WatsonDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 1958

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

Powered by the Exa API