Legal Opinion
In Re Koehring
Court of Customs and Patent Appeals
Decided January 27, 1930No. Patent Appeal 2167PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
BLAND, Judge.
This appeal from the decision of the Commissioner of Patents, refusing a patent for a design for a concrete mixer truck body and frame, presents as its main issue the very interesting, and of times troublesome, question as to what articles of manufacture may constitute the subject-matter of design patents.
The Commissioner, largely unon the authority of Ex parte Steck, 1902 C. D. 9, 98 O. G. 228, held that a machine with movable parte is not an “article of manufacture” within the meaning of the design patent law, the pertinent portion of which reads as follows: “Any person who'…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Ashley v. Weeks-Numan Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1915
- Rowe v. Blodgett & Clapp Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1901
- R. E. Dietz Co. v. Burr & Starkweather Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1917
- North British Rubber Co. v. Racine Rubber Tire Co. of New York, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1921
- Bradley v. EcclesCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1903
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Application of StevensCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1949
- A & H Mfg. Co., Inc. v. Contempo Card Co., Inc.District Court, D. Rhode Island · 1983
- In Re La MontagneCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1932
- Norco Products, Inc. v. Mecca Development, Inc.District Court, D. Connecticut · 1985
- Best Lock Corporation v. Ilco Unican CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1996
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.