Legal Opinion
Ransdall v. Jahns
District Court, District of Columbia
Decided May 2, 1921No. 1416PublishedCited by 3 opinions
Appeal from the Commissioner of Patents. Interference proceeding between Harry W. Ransdall and William H. Jahns. From a decision of the Commissioner of Patents in favor of Jahns, Ransdall appeals.
1Opinion of the Court
VAN ORSDEL, Associate Justice.
The invention in interference relates to leak-proof piston rings, described in the opinion of the Board of Examiners in Chief as follows:
“The invention at issue relates to leak-proof piston rings and includes an inner slip expander ring having outer inclined faces and being of a width to fill the opening of the groove in a piston. Outer triangular split metal packing rings fit the inclined faces of the inner ring and are of thin cross-section, so as to be forced into contact with the wall of the cylinder by the expander ring.”
[1] Appellant, Ransdall, filed his…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Chapman v. WintroathSupreme Court of the United States · 1920
3Cited by3 opinions
- American Laundry Machinery Co. v. Prosperity Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1924
- American Laundry Machinery Co. v. Prosperity Co.District Court, N.D. New York · 1923
- Splitdorf Electrical Co. v. Webster Electric Co.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1921