Legal Opinion
McBride v. Coe
District Court, District of Columbia
Decided June 4, 1943No. Civil Action No. 14222PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
LUHRING, Justice.
This is an action under R.S. § 4915, 35 U.S.C.A. § 63, in which the plaintiffs seek to have the Court authorize the allowance of a reissue of their patent, No. 1,955,927, relating to the process of making propel*287lant powders, which was granted to the plaintiff McBride April 24, 1934.
The original application was filed by McBride November 14, 1930, and was given serial number 495,672. During the pendency of this application, one Oliver J. Teeple, Jr., made application for a patent on a process of producing propellant powder. This application was filed October 27, 1932, and given…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Hemphill Co. v. CoeCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1941
- Blackford v. WilderDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1907
- In re WasserfallenCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1924
- McBride v. TeepleCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1940
- Chase v. CoeCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1941
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Mas v. Coca Cola Co.Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1952
- Etten v. Lovell Mfg. Co.District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 1949
- Alumatone Corp. v. Vita-Var Corp.Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1950
- Alumatone Corporation v. Vitavar CorporationCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1950
- Alumatone Corporation v. Vitavar CorporationCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1950