Kurzen v. Marzall

D.C. Circuit

Kurzen v. Marzall

188 F.2d 673, 89 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 16, 88 U.S. App. D.C. 274, 1951 U.S. App. LEXIS 4142

CourtCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit

DecidedMarch 29, 1951

Docket10728_1

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 188 F.2d 673 (Kurzen v. Marzall) 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

Kurzen v. Marzall, 188 F.2d 673, 89 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 16, 88 U.S. App. D.C. 274, 1951 U.S. App. LEXIS 4142 (D.C. Cir. 1951).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from a judgment of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia. The District Court dismissed the appellant’s complaint by which the appellant sought to have the court authorize the issuance of a design patent. The refusal of the patent by the Patent Office and the District Court was based upon lack of invention over the prior art.

The application involved in this proceeding discloses a design for a phonograph cabinet comprising a box, essentially square in conformation but having a thickness substantially less than other dimensions. The casing is provided with rounded corners, two side-by-side grills near the top of one of the larger faces, and a handle folded into one of the edges. Each one of these features is contained in a prior patent.

We feel the lower court was quite correct when it held that “A number of references may be used in rejecting a claim to a design if each of the features is old and no invention is involved in combining them.” Therefore, the judgment of the District Court is

Affirmed.

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