The Commonwealth Engineering Company of Ohio and Carl Berger v. David L. Ladd, Commissioner of Patents

304 F.2d 630, 113 U.S. App. D.C. 53, 133 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 618, 1962 U.S. App. LEXIS 4955
Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit·Decided May 31, 1962·No. 16862_1·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This appeal from the denial of a patent application is wholly without merit. The trial judge, in a de novo proceeding, patiently afforded appellants every opportunity to develop their case. But they failed to show that their frozen blood thawing process would produce the result claimed or be otherwise useful. Accordingly, we affirm on the opinion of the District Court. Commonwealth Engineering Co. v. Ladd, D. D.C., 199 F.Supp. 51.

Affirmed.

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

The Commonwealth Engineering Company of Ohio and Carl Berger v. David L. Ladd, Commissioner of Patents, 304 F.2d 630, 113 U.S. App. D.C. 53, 133 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 618, 1962 U.S. App. LEXIS 4955 (D.C. Cir. 1962).

304 F.2d 630 (The Commonwealth Engineering Company of Ohio and Carl Berger v. David L. Ladd, Commissioner of Patents) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Henry K. Puharich v. Edward J. Brenner
415 F.2d 979 (D.C. Circuit, 1969)
Schindler v. Commissioner of Patents
269 F. Supp. 630 (District of Columbia, 1967)
John Threatt v. United States
304 F.2d 630 (D.C. Circuit, 1962)