Cupples v. Watson, Commissioner of Patents

D.C. Circuit

Cupples v. Watson, Commissioner of Patents

204 F.2d 58, 97 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 1, 92 U.S. App. D.C. 166, 1953 U.S. App. LEXIS 4336

CourtCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit

DecidedMarch 26, 1953

Docket11401_1

StatusPublished

Cited by6 cases

This text of 204 F.2d 58 (Cupples v. Watson, Commissioner of Patents) 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

Cupples v. Watson, Commissioner of Patents, 204 F.2d 58, 97 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 1, 92 U.S. App. D.C. 166, 1953 U.S. App. LEXIS 4336 (D.C. Cir. 1953).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellant seeks to require appellee, the Commissioner of Patents, to admit him to practice before the Patent Office despite his failure to pass an examination. The trial judge thought it his duty, among other things, to read the examination questions and appellant’s answers to them and to review the grading of these answers to the extent of determining that “by reasonable tests, the officials of the Patent Office acted fairly and without discrimination in the grading of the plaintiff’s examination, pursuant to a uniform standard, that the plaintiff failed to pass the required examination,” etc. Cupples v. Marzall, D.C., 101 F.Supp. 579, 583. We need not decide whether in our opinion this kind of review of the examination was necessary. In all other respects we agree with the'opinion of the District Court

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

Appellant seeks to require appellee, the Commissioner of Patents, to admit him to practice before the Patent Office despite his failure to pass an examination. The trial judge thought it his duty, among other things, to read the examination questions and appellant’s answers to them and to review the grading of these answers to the extent of determining that “by reasonable tests, the officials of the Patent Office acted fairly and without discrimination in the grading of the plaintiff’s examination, pursuant to a uniform standard, that the plaintiff failed to pass the required examination,” etc. Cupples v. Marzall, D.C., 101 F.Supp. 579, 583. We need not decide whether in our opinion this kind of review of the examination was necessary. In all other respects we agree with the'opinion of the District Court

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

204 F.2d 58, 97 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 1, 92 U.S. App. D.C. 166, 1953 U.S. App. LEXIS 4336, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cupples-v-watson-commissioner-of-patents-cadc-1953.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack