Cawood v. Coe

D.C. Circuit

Cawood v. Coe

122 F.2d 553, 74 App. D.C. 396, 51 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 548, 1941 U.S. App. LEXIS 3025

Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit·Decided June 30, 1941·No. No. 7750·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This is a suit to obtain a patent on an improvement in ball mills for grinding or “dispersing” paint, ink products, etc. The claims relate to “streamlined enlargements” or gradual undulations on the inside of, and integral with, the wall of the mill. We think the Patent Office and the District Court were clearly right in finding that the claims lack invention over the prior art.

Affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

This is a suit to obtain a patent on an improvement in ball mills for grinding or “dispersing” paint, ink products, etc. The claims relate to “streamlined enlargements” or gradual undulations on the inside of, and integral with, the wall of the mill. We think the Patent Office and the District Court were clearly right in finding that the claims lack invention over the prior art.

Affirmed.

Cawood v. Coe, 122 F.2d 553, 74 App. D.C. 396, 51 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 548, 1941 U.S. App. LEXIS 3025 (D.C. Cir. 1941).

Pincite

122 F.2d 553 (Cawood v. Coe) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.