Legal Opinion
In re Coykendall
Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
Decided December 3, 1928No. 2073PublishedCited by 10 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MARTIN, Chief Justice.
This is an appeal from a decision of the Commissioner of Patents affirming concurring decisions of the examiner and board of examiners in chief, rejecting all of the claims, twelve in number, of appellant’s application for a patent.
The invention claimed is described as a system of marine propulsion particularly adapted for boats in which the capability of quick maneuvering is essential. The invention is embodied in a boat in which the motive power is derived from an internal combustion engine, specifically a Diesel engine. The engine is directly connected to a two-part…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Permutit Co. v. Harvey Laundry Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1922
- Diamond Patent Co. v. S. E. Carr Co.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1914
- General Electric Co. v. WiseU.S. Circuit Court for the District of Northern New York · 1903
- Kirchberger v. American Acetylene Burner Co.U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Northern New York · 1903
- Hale & Kilburn Mfg. Co. v. Oneonta, Cooperstown & Richfield Springs Ry. Co.U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Northern New York · 1904
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Wach v. CoeCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1935
- Kelley v. CoeCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1938
- Minnesota Mining & Mfg. Co. v. CoeCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1940
- Bragg-Kliesrath Corporation v. FarrellCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1929
- General Electric Supply Corp. v. Maytag Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1938
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.