Legal Opinion

Houghton v. Ooms

District Court, District of Columbia

Decided June 3, 1946No. 9147Published

1Per curiam

This is a suit under R. S. § 4915, 35 U.S. C. § 63, 35 U.S.C.A. § 63, to obtain a patent. The record supports the District Court’s findings that the claims do not distinguish over the prior art except in terms of function, General Electric Co. v. Wabash Appliance Corp., 304 U.S. 364, 58 S.Ct. 899, 82 L.Ed. 1402, Minnesota Mining & Mfg. Co. v. Coe, 72 App.D C. 183, 113 F.2d 512, and that the claims do not define an invention. The judgment dismissing the complaint is therefore affirmed.

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. General Electric Co. v. Wabash Appliance Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1938
  2. Minnesota Mining & Mfg. Co. v. CoeCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1940