In re Power

281 F. 431, 52 App. D.C. 71, 1922 U.S. App. LEXIS 2097
Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit·Decided June 5, 1922·No. No. 1447·Published

Opinion

VAN ORSDEE, Associate Justice.

This appeal is from the decision of the Commissioner of Patents, denying a patent for an invention on the ground that a machine embodying the claim of the issue was sold by applicant more than two years prior to the date of filing his application for patent.

It conclusively appears that such a sale was made. This bars applicant’s right to a patent, since the sale amounts to a dedication of the invention to public use. R. S. § 4886 (Comp. St. § 9430). Commenting on this provision of the statute, the court, in Smith & Griggs Manufacturing Co. v. Sprague, 123 U. S. 249, 237, 8 Sup. Ct. 122, 126 (31 L. Ed. 141), said:

“A single sale to another of such a machine as that shown to have been in use by the complainant more than two years prior to the date of his application would certainly have defeated his right to a patent.”

See, also, National Cash Register Co. v. American Cash Register Co. 178 Fed. 79, 101 C. C. A. 569; Mayer v. A. & H. G. Mutschler et al., 248 Fed. 911, 161 C. C. A. 29; Wendell et al. v. American Laundry Machinery Co. et al., 248 Fed. 698, 160 C. C. A. 598.

The decision of the Commissioner is affirmed.

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

In re Power, 281 F. 431, 52 App. D.C. 71, 1922 U.S. App. LEXIS 2097 (D.C. Cir. 1922).

281 F. 431 (In re Power) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Smith & Griggs Manufacturing Co. v. Sprague
123 U.S. 249 (Supreme Court, 1887)
Wendell v. American Laundry Machinery Co.
248 F. 698 (Third Circuit, 1918)
Mayer v. Mutschler
248 F. 911 (Second Circuit, 1918)