In re Forsyth

D.C. Circuit

In re Forsyth

17 F.2d 688, 57 App. D.C. 100, 1927 U.S. App. LEXIS 3010

CourtCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit

DecidedFebruary 7, 1927

DocketNo. 1878

StatusPublished

This text of 17 F.2d 688 (In re Forsyth) 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

In re Forsyth, 17 F.2d 688, 57 App. D.C. 100, 1927 U.S. App. LEXIS 3010 (D.C. Cir. 1927).

Pincite

Opinion

VAN ORSDEL, Associate Justice.

Appellant was denied a .patent on a claim for an ornamental design for a disk wheel, and accordingly this appeal was taken.

We deem it unnecessary to consider the case at length, as we are clearly of the opinion that, if appellant’s design would be patentable, in the absence of anticipation by the disclosures of the prior art, he is completely barred by existing patents cited in the decisions of the tribunals below.

The decision of the Commissioner is affirmed:

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

VAN ORSDEL, Associate Justice.

Appellant was denied a .patent on a claim for an ornamental design for a disk wheel, and accordingly this appeal was taken.

We deem it unnecessary to consider the case at length, as we are clearly of the opinion that, if appellant’s design would be patentable, in the absence of anticipation by the disclosures of the prior art, he is completely barred by existing patents cited in the decisions of the tribunals below.

The decision of the Commissioner is affirmed:

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

17 F.2d 688, 57 App. D.C. 100, 1927 U.S. App. LEXIS 3010, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-forsyth-cadc-1927.