Legal Opinion
De Forest v. Meissner
Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
Decided May 5, 1924No. Nos. 1638-1642PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
VAN ORSDEE, Associate Justice.
This interference comes here on appeal by the parties Eangmuif, De Forest, and Meissner, from the decision of the Commissioner of Patents awarding priority to Armstrong; also appeals by De Forest against Meissner and Langmuir jointly, and against Langmuir, individually, for the invention set forth in the following counts:
“1. Means for producing sustained electrical oscillations comprising an oscillatory circuit having two electrodes in an exhausted receptacle and a second circuit coupled thereto having a conducting body interposed between said electrodes.”
“2.…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Armstrong v. De Forest Radio Telephone & Telegraph Co.District Court, S.D. New York · 1921
- De Forest v. MillerCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1921
3Cited by8 opinions
- Radio Corp. of America v. Radio Engineering Laboratories, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1934
- Westinghouse Electric & Mfg. Co. v. De Forest Radio Telephone & Telegraph Co.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1927
- De Forest Radio Telephone & Telegraph Co. v. Westinghouse Electric & Mfg. Co.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1924
- Langmuir v. De ForestDistrict Court, D. Delaware · 1927
- Radio Corp. v. Radio Engineering Laboratories, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1933
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.