Legal Opinion
Miessner v. Hoschke
District Court, District of Columbia
Decided November 2, 1942No. 7962PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
VINSON, Associate Justice.
An appeal has been taken from a judgment of the District Court dismissing an action instituted by appellants to review, under Section 4915 of the Revised Statutes,1 a decision of the Patent Office in an interference proceeding,2 wherein priority of invention was awarded appellees. In the interests of clarity, the appellants, as well as Miessner, through whom their rights are derived, will be referred to as Miess-ner; and the appellees, as well as Ploschke, through whom their rights are derived, will be referred to as Hoschke.
The invention involved is a development in…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Van Auken v. CummingsCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1931
- Collins v. OlsenCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1939
- Janette v. FoldsCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1930
- Crane v. CarlsonCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1942
- Akers v. PapstCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1940
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Reese v. HurstCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1981
- Interchemical Corporation v. WatsonDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 1956
- Konet v. HaskinsCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1950
- Mathieson Alkali Works, Inc. v. CrowleyCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1943
- Adam v. RothCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1949
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.