Webster v. Fish

277 F. 593, 51 App. D.C. 194, 1922 U.S. App. LEXIS 2786
CourtCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
DecidedJanuary 3, 1922
DocketNo. 1418
StatusPublished

This text of 277 F. 593 (Webster v. Fish) 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
Webster v. Fish, 277 F. 593, 51 App. D.C. 194, 1922 U.S. App. LEXIS 2786 (D.C. Cir. 1922).

Opinion

•ROBB, Associate Justice.

This is an appeal from a decision of the Patent Office in an interference proceeding, in which priority was awarded the senior party, Fish. The invention relates to automatic telephony, and the two counts differ from the counts in Nos. 1441 to 1444, inclusive, 277 Fed. 586, this day decided, in that they contain an additional limitation. Count 1, which is sufficiently illustrative, reads as follows:

“1. In a telephone system, a pair of subscribers’ lines connected by trunk lines at a central office, automatic switching devices for said subscribers’ lines having movements in planes at right angles to each other to select a given line, and means whereby eiftter the calling or called subscriber may release by simply opening the talking circuit, whereby the system is independent of the ground at the substations for releasing purposes.”

In addition to the evidence here, it has been stipulated that evidence offered in behalf of Webster in the case above referred to is to be considered.

[594]*594The Examiners in Chief and the Assistant Commissioner have found Webster lacking in diligence here, as in the other cases, and, as in those cases, we find no sufficient reason for disturbing the finding.

The decision is affirmed.

Affirmed.

Mr. Justice HITZ, of the Supreme Court of the District of Columbia, sat in the place of Mr. Justice VAN ORSDEE in the hearing and determination of this appeal.

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

Related

Goodrum v. Clement
277 F. 586 (D.C. Circuit, 1922)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
277 F. 593, 51 App. D.C. 194, 1922 U.S. App. LEXIS 2786, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/webster-v-fish-cadc-1922.