Legal Opinion
American Laundry Machinery Co. v. Prosperity Co.
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
Decided January 25, 1924No. 176PublishedCited by 14 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtHoltgh, Circuit Judge
(after stating the facts as above). The matter at bar is interesting and not unimportant; for, if the order appealed from be well founded, its effect is to render a familiar portion of Patent Office' practice extremely dangerous for those acquiescing therein, yet such danger is said to be created by a decision of the Supreme Court. Chapman v. Wintroath, 252 U. S. 126, 40 Sup. Ct. 234, 64 L. Ed. 491.
Under what the cited decision calls “the statute which is fundamental to all others in our patent law” (R. S. § 4886 [Comp. St. § 9430]), patents are granted to those inventing new and useful arts…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Smith v. Goodyear Dental Vulcanite Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1877
- Chapman v. WintroathSupreme Court of the United States · 1920
- Godfrey v. EamesSupreme Court of the United States · 1864
- Victor Talking Mach. Co. v. American Graphophone Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1906
- Bennet v. FowlerSupreme Court of the United States · 1869
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- Webster Electric Co. v. Splitdorf Electrical Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1924
- Dwight & Lloyd Sintering Co. v. GreenawaltCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1928
- Wagenhorst v. Hydraulic Steel Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1928
- Westinghouse Electric & Mfg. Co. v. Jeffrey-De Witt Insulator Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1927
- Lektophone Corp. v. Miller Bros.District Court, D. Delaware · 1930
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.