From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Commonwealth Engineering Co. v. Ladd

United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit
May 31, 1962
304 F.2d 630 (D.C. Cir. 1962)

Opinion

No. 16862.

Argued May 18, 1962.

Decided May 31, 1962

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia; Alexander Holtzoff, District Judge.

Mr. Folsom E. Drummond, Washington, D.C., with whom Mr. Harry A. Toulmin, Jr., Washington, D.C., was on the brief, for appellants.

Mr. J.E. Armore, Atty., with whom Mr. Clarence W. Moore, Solicitor, U.S. Patent Office, was on the brief, for appellee.

Before WILBUR K. MILLER, Chief Judge, and BURGER and WRIGHT, Circuit Judges.


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.


Summaries of

Commonwealth Engineering Co. v. Ladd

United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit
May 31, 1962
304 F.2d 630 (D.C. Cir. 1962)
Case details for

Commonwealth Engineering Co. v. Ladd

Case Details

Full title:The COMMONWEALTH ENGINEERING COMPANY OF OHIO and Carl Berger, Appellants…

Court:United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit

Date published: May 31, 1962

Citations

304 F.2d 630 (D.C. Cir. 1962)
113 U.S. App. D.C. 53

Citing Cases

Puharich v. Brenner

"Usefulness" within the context of section 101 means that an invention "would produce the result claimed or…