Rose v. Brownlee

2 F.2d 1013, 55 App. D.C. 398, 1924 U.S. App. LEXIS 2228
CourtCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
DecidedDecember 1, 1924
DocketNo. 1684
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 2 F.2d 1013 (Rose v. Brownlee) 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
Rose v. Brownlee, 2 F.2d 1013, 55 App. D.C. 398, 1924 U.S. App. LEXIS 2228 (D.C. Cir. 1924).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

By the concurring decisions of the three tribunals of the Patent Office, appellee's were awarded priority of invention over appellant Rose. The invention consists of heating gas to be used with oxygen in metal cutting and welding. Appellant is the junior party by over three years. This point, however, is of little importance, since the case turns upon the question of originality of invention. Only issues of fact are involved, and from an examination of the record we find no reason to disturb the findings of the various tribunals of the Patent Office. The decision of the Commissioner of Patents is affirmed.

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

Related

Smith v. Pritchard
24 F.2d 274 (D.C. Circuit, 1928)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2 F.2d 1013, 55 App. D.C. 398, 1924 U.S. App. LEXIS 2228, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rose-v-brownlee-cadc-1924.