U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, 1941

Peterson v. Coe

U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · Decided December 29, 1941 · Edgerton, Groner, Vinson

124 F.2d 522; 75 U.S. App. D.C. 160; 52 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 152; 1941 U.S. App. LEXIS 2554 (Federal Reporter, Second Series)

Counsel

Mr. Warren C. Horton, of Chicago, Ill., of the bar of State of Illinois pro hac vice, by special leave of court with whom Mr. James H. Littlehales, of Washington, D. C., was on the brief, for appellant., Mr. H. S. Mackey, with whom Mr. W. W. Cochran, Solicitor, both of the United States Patent Office, was on the brief, for appellee.

Opinion of the Court

PER CURIAM.

This is a suit under R.S. § 4915, 35 U.S.C. A. § 63, to obtain a patent on a mattress. Appellant’s application discloses, in the opposite sides of an inner-spring mattress ventilated by grommets, padding of different heat-conducting characteristics. The more efficient conductor is to be placed next the sleeper in summer, and the less efficient in winter. The prior Nelson mattress, patent No. 341,387, also used two different materials, and Nelson recited that “the cotton may be used for sleeping on in cold weather, and the hair side in hot weather.” Farrow patent No. 1,205,135 shows an innerspring mattress ventilated by grommets. Whether or not the unventilated Nelson construction was an effective summer-and-winter mattress, we cannot say that appellant’s device shows invention over these references. It is therefore unnecessary to consider others, including Odets, No. 1,973,-651.

Affirmed.

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