Convery v. Brucker

D.C. Circuit

Convery v. Brucker

278 F. 1019, 51 App. D.C. 306, 1922 U.S. App. LEXIS 2762

CourtCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit

DecidedMarch 6, 1922

DocketNo. 1430

StatusPublished

This text of 278 F. 1019 (Convery v. Brucker) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Convery v. Brucker, 278 F. 1019, 51 App. D.C. 306, 1922 U.S. App. LEXIS 2762 (D.C. Cir. 1922).

Pincite

Opinion

ROBB, Associate Justice.

Appeal fi-om concurrent decisions of the Patent Office tribunals in an interference proceeding in which priority was awarded the senior party, Brucker, whose filing date was prior to appellant’s earliest claimed date of reduction to practice.

The tribunals below having fully and satisfactorily disposed of every contention made by appellant, we affirm the decision appealed from, without further discussion.

Affirmed.

Mr. Justice HITZ, of the Supreme Court of the District of Columbia, sat in the place of Mr. Justice VAN ORSDEL in the hearing and determination of this appeal.

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

ROBB, Associate Justice.

Appeal fi-om concurrent decisions of the Patent Office tribunals in an interference proceeding in which priority was awarded the senior party, Brucker, whose filing date was prior to appellant’s earliest claimed date of reduction to practice.

The tribunals below having fully and satisfactorily disposed of every contention made by appellant, we affirm the decision appealed from, without further discussion.

Affirmed.

Mr. Justice HITZ, of the Supreme Court of the District of Columbia, sat in the place of Mr. Justice VAN ORSDEL in the hearing and determination of this appeal.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

278 F. 1019, 51 App. D.C. 306, 1922 U.S. App. LEXIS 2762, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/convery-v-brucker-cadc-1922.