U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit, 1920

Luten v. Allen

U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · Decided January 22, 1920 · Amidon

263 F. 986; 1920 U.S. App. LEXIS 2121

Counsel

Russell T. MacFall, of Indianapolis, Ind. (Joseph G. Carey, of Wichita, Kan., on the brief), for appellant., S. N. Hawkes, of Topeka, Kan. (Richard J. Hopkins, of Topeka, Kan., on the brief), for appellees.

Cases that cite this one

2 later published cases cite this decision.

Hills v. Federal Optical Co. (District Court, D. Massachusetts 1923)
Luten v. Wilson Reinforced Concrete Co. (8th Cir. 1920)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

AMIDON, District Judge.

The bill in Luten v. Allen charges infringement of patent No. 818,386, issued to plaintiff April 17, 1906. The bill in Luten v. Young charges infringement of patent No. 853,203, issued to plaintiff May 7, 1907. The cases were heard together in the trial court and here. The lower court sustained motions to dismiss, because the patents (copies of which were attached to the bill) were devoid of patentable invention (254 Fed. 587 and 591), and the present appeal seeks a review of that decree.

For reasons set forth in opinion filed January 15, 1920, in Luten v. Wilson Reinforced Concrete Co., 263 Fed. 983,- C. C. A.-, the decrees are affirmed.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.