Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

269 F. 1020

Docket No. 1332.

In re Murray

District of Columbia Circuit Court of Appeals

Submitted; November 10, 1920.

Decided December 6, 1920.)

District of Columbia Circuit Court of Appeals · decided 1920-12-06

<p>Appeal from the Commissioner of Patents. Application by C. Edward Murray, Jr., for a patent for improvements in the construction of rubber tires. From a decision of the Commissioner of Patents, rejecting the application for lack of novelty, the applicant appeals.</p>

2 counsel of record

Affirmed · Opinion by (per_curiam) · Decided 1920-12-06

¶1Appeal from the Commissioner of Patents. Application by C. Edward Murray, Jr., for a patent for improvements in the construction of rubber tires. From a decision of the Commissioner of Patents, rejecting the application for lack of novelty, the applicant appeals.

¶2Affirmed.

¶3Alfred M. Houghton, of Washington, D. C. (D. Y. Mahoney, of Oakland, Cal., on the brief), for appellant.

¶4T. A. Hostetler, of Washington, D. C., for Commissioner of Patents.

¶5PER CURIAM.

¶6Appellant appeals from the decision of the Commissioner of Patents, denying him a patent for certain improvements in the construction of rubber tires. We agree with the unanimous opinions of the tribunals below in holding that nothing patentable is disclosed over the prior art. The decision of the Commissioner of Patents is affirmed, and the clerk is directed to certify these proceedings as by law required. Affirmed.

/269/f1d/1020 · .json · Public domain