Grossman v. Gamble
This text of 26 F.2d 1015 (Grossman v. Gamble) 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.
Opinion
Appeal from a decision of the Patent Office in an interference proceeding awarding priority of invention to the party Gamble.
The first two of the three counts of the interference relate to a collapsible bag, used principally in carrying ladies' hats. The third count relates to a bag “of the character described,” with “a handle comprising a strip secured at one end in the seam at one side of the bag, and a tab secured to the free edge of the closure flap, and means on the free ends of said strip and tab for detachably securing them together.”
The party Gamble was the first in the field, and all three tribunals, after a careful review of the evidence, awarded her priority as to counts 1 and 2. The Examiner of Interferences, being of the view that Mrs. Gamble was without sufficient corroboration as to the time when a bag embodying the elements in the third count was made, awarded that count to appellants. The Examiners in Chief and the Commissioner held that there was such corroboration, and awarded the count accordingly.
A review of the evidence convinces us'of the correctness of the conclusion finally reached, and we therefore, for the reasons more fully stated in the opinions of the Board and the Commissioner, affirm the decision.
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
26 F.2d 1015, 58 App. D.C. 399, 1928 U.S. App. LEXIS 3835, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/grossman-v-gamble-cadc-1928.