Theodore A. Te Grotenhuis v. Robert C. Watson, Commissioner of Patents

222 F.2d 412, 95 U.S. App. D.C. 387, 105 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 255, 1955 U.S. App. LEXIS 5422
CourtCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
DecidedMay 5, 1955
Docket12403
StatusPublished

This text of 222 F.2d 412 (Theodore A. Te Grotenhuis 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
Theodore A. Te Grotenhuis v. Robert C. Watson, Commissioner of Patents, 222 F.2d 412, 95 U.S. App. D.C. 387, 105 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 255, 1955 U.S. App. LEXIS 5422 (D.C. Cir. 1955).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Theodore A. Te Grotenhuis sued in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia under § 4915 of the Revised Statutes, 35 U.S.C. § 145, asking that the Commissioner of Patents be authorized to issue Letters Patent covering certain claims of his patent application, Serial No. 585,824, which had been rejected by the Board of Appeals of the Patent Office. The District Court dismissed, and Te Grotenhuis appeals.

The specification of appellant’s application describes pigmented coating compositions such as paints and lacquers and methods of making them. The claims in issue related to an emulsion or water-base paint which is said to have the less porous and more glossy film. The District Court held that some of the claims sought were unpatentable because they were too broad; that one was un-patentable over appellant’s prior patent, No. 2,394,025, in view of Safford; and that the others were unpatentable over Safford. (The Safford patents are Nos. 2,424,853 and 2,510,661.)

We have carefully studied the record and have found no error.

Affirmed.

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

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
222 F.2d 412, 95 U.S. App. D.C. 387, 105 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 255, 1955 U.S. App. LEXIS 5422, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/theodore-a-te-grotenhuis-v-robert-c-watson-commissioner-of-patents-cadc-1955.