Houghton v. Ooms

District Court, District of Columbia
Houghton v. Ooms, 155 F.2d 745 (1946)
81 U.S. App. D.C. 153; 69 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 458; 1946 U.S. App. LEXIS 3846

Houghton v. Ooms

Opinion of the Court

PER CURIAM.

This is a suit under R. S. § 4915, 35 U.S. C. § 63, 35 U.S.C.A. § 63, to obtain a patent. The record supports the District Court’s findings that the claims do not distinguish over the prior art except in terms of function, General Electric Co. v. Wabash Appliance Corp., 304 U.S. 364, 58 S.Ct. 899, 82 L.Ed. 1402, Minnesota Mining & Mfg. Co. v. Coe, 72 App.D C. 183, 113 F.2d 512, and that the claims do not define an invention. The judgment dismissing the complaint is therefore affirmed.

Reference

Full Case Name
HOUGHTON v. OOMS, Commissioner of Patents
Status
Published