Gustav Schafer v. Robert C
Gustav SCHAFER, Appellant, v. Robert C. WATSON, Commissioner of Patents, Appellee; Herbert BESTIAN Et Al., Appellants, v. Robert C. WATSON, Commissioner of Patents, Appellee
Opinion
PER CURIAM.
The Patent Office having rejected certain patent claims of the appellants as unpatentable over the prior art, appellants brought these suits against the Commissioner of Patents under 66 Stat. 803 , 35 U.S.C. § 145 . The District Court held a hearing, agreed with the Patent Office that the claims were not inventive, and dismissed the complaints.
“Although a court, when it agrees with a Patent Office finding, often says so, agreement is not necessary to affirmance and disagreement is not sufficient for reversal.” Abbott v. Coe, 71 App.D.C. 195, 197 , 109 F.2d 449, 451 . “Since invention is a question of fact, a reasonable finding that claims lack invention should not be set aside.” Besser v. Ooms, 81 U.S.App.D.C. 7, 8 , 154 F.2d 17, 18 . “As we pointed out in Abbott v. Coe, * * * a mere preponderance of the evidence is not sufficient with regard to invention; the Patent Office finding must be accepted if it is 'consistent with the evidence,’ the Patent Office being an expert body pre-eminently qualified to determine questions of this kind.” Esso Standard Oil Co. v. Sun Oil Co., 97 U.S.App.D.C. 154 , 157, 229 F.2d 37, 40 . The Patent Office findings do not appear to have been unreasonable. The District Court was therefore right in dismissing the complaints. Moreover, its findings are not to be set aside unless clearly erroneous. F.R.Civ.P. Rule 52 (a), 28 U.S.C.A.
Affirmed.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 8 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
- Gustav Schafer v. Robert C
- The Maytag Company, a Corporation v. The Murray Corporation of America, a Corporation
- Edwid E. Hays and Wallace & Tiernan, Inc. v. Edward J. Brenner, Commissioner of Patents
- Edwin L. Reynolds, Acting Commissioner of Patents v. Elie P. Aghnides
- Goodyear Tire and Rubber Company v. David L. Ladd, Commissioner of Patents
- Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. v. Ladd
Most recent
- Marvin K. Swofford, Marion F. Wright and Essex Corporation, D/B/A the Pathfinder Company v. B & W, Inc., B & W, Inc. v. Marvin K. Swofford, Marion F. Wright and Essex Corporation, D/B/A Thepathfinder Company
- Edwid E. Hays and Wallace & Tiernan, Inc. v. Edward J. Brenner, Commissioner of Patents
- Edwin L. Reynolds, Acting Commissioner of Patents v. Elie P. Aghnides
- Goodyear Tire and Rubber Company v. David L. Ladd, Commissioner of Patents
- Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. v. Ladd
- The Maytag Company, a Corporation v. The Murray Corporation of America, a Corporation
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.