Shell Development Company, a Delaware Corporation, Doing Business at Emeryville, California v. Robert C. Watson, Commissioner of Patents

252 F.2d 861, 116 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 428, 102 U.S. App. D.C. 297, 1958 U.S. App. LEXIS 5910
CourtCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
DecidedMarch 6, 1958
Docket13945_1
StatusPublished

This text of 252 F.2d 861 (Shell Development Company, a Delaware Corporation, Doing Business at Emeryville, California v. Robert C. Watson, Commissioner of Patents) 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
Shell Development Company, a Delaware Corporation, Doing Business at Emeryville, California v. Robert C. Watson, Commissioner of Patents, 252 F.2d 861, 116 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 428, 102 U.S. App. D.C. 297, 1958 U.S. App. LEXIS 5910 (D.C. Cir. 1958).

Opinion

252 F.2d 861

102 U.S.App.D.C. 297, 116 U.S.P.Q. 428

SHELL DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, a Delaware Corporation, doing
business at Emeryville, California, Appellant,
v.
Robert C. WATSON, Commissioner of Patents, Appellee.

No. 13945.

United States Court of Appeals District of Columbia Circuit.

Argued Dec. 16, 1957.
Decided March 6, 1958.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia; Edward M. Curran, Judge.

Mr. James M. Parker, Chicago, Ill., of the bar of the Supreme Court of Illinois, pro hac vice, by special leave of Court, with whom Messrs. Edward B. Beale and George R. Jones, Washington, D.C., were on the brief, for appellant.

Mr. Joseph Schimmel, Attorney, United States Patent Office, with whom Mr. Clarence W. Moore, Solicitor, United States Patent Office, was on the brief, for appellee.

Before WILBUR K. MILLER, BAZELON and BURGER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

In this suit under 35 U.S.C. 145, the District Court upheld the Patent Office in its refusal to grant appellant's application for a patent. The issues are fully described in an opinion by the District Court, 1957, 149 F.Supp. 279, and we find no basis for disturbing the conclusions reached therein.

Affirmed.

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

Related

Shell Development Company v. Watson
149 F. Supp. 279 (District of Columbia, 1957)
Shell Development Co. v. Watson
252 F.2d 861 (D.C. Circuit, 1958)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
252 F.2d 861, 116 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 428, 102 U.S. App. D.C. 297, 1958 U.S. App. LEXIS 5910, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/shell-development-company-a-delaware-corporation-doing-business-at-cadc-1958.