Schlafly v. Smith

District of Columbia Court of Appeals

Schlafly v. Smith

42 App. D.C. 339, 1914 U.S. App. LEXIS 2284

CourtDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals

DecidedMay 22, 1914

DocketNo. 907

StatusPublished

This text of 42 App. D.C. 339 (Schlafly v. Smith) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District of Columbia Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Schlafly v. Smith, 42 App. D.C. 339, 1914 U.S. App. LEXIS 2284 (D.C. 1914).

Pincite

Opinion

Mr. Chief Justice Siiepard

delivered the opinion of the Court:

Upon an examination of the record we agree with the conclusions of the Examiners in Chief and the Commissioner, that the proof is not sufficient to show the construction of the draining culvert of the issue by Schlafly prior to the original filing date of Smith; and that the latter is entitled to the award of priority. It is unnecessary to add anything to the decisions of the Office tribunals. The decision is affirmed, and the Clerk will certify this decision to the Commissioner of Patents.

Affirmed.

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

Mr. Chief Justice Siiepard

delivered the opinion of the Court:

Upon an examination of the record we agree with the conclusions of the Examiners in Chief and the Commissioner, that the proof is not sufficient to show the construction of the draining culvert of the issue by Schlafly prior to the original filing date of Smith; and that the latter is entitled to the award of priority. It is unnecessary to add anything to the decisions of the Office tribunals. The decision is affirmed, and the Clerk will certify this decision to the Commissioner of Patents.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

42 App. D.C. 339, 1914 U.S. App. LEXIS 2284, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/schlafly-v-smith-dc-1914.