Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

273 F.2d 520

Docket No. 15232.

Wyman v. Watson

District of Columbia Circuit Court of Appeals

Argued Nov. 20, 1959. Decided Dec. 17, 1959.

District of Columbia Circuit Court of Appeals · decided 1959-12-17

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently December 1959

1 federal appellate ·

2 counsel of record

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Opinion by Per Curiam · Decided 1959-12-17

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Mr. Miles D. Pillars, Washington, D.C., with whom Mr. Jesse C. Bowyer, Washington, D.C., was on the brief, for appellant.

Mr. David Kreider, Attorney, United States Patent Office, with whom Mr. Clarence W. Moore, Solicitor, United States Patent Office, was on the brief, for appellee.

Before EDGERTON, WILBUR K. MILLER and BASTIAN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

¶1

Edwin T. Wyman applied January 31, 1950, for a patent on a 'snap-in' valve for use on tubeless tires. His application bears Serial No. 141,503. Certain claims covering one variety of the valve were allowed by the Commissioner of Patents, but he disallowed claim 11, which is broad and generic. Thereupon Wyman sued in the United States District Court under 35 U.S.C. 145 for an adjudication authorizing the Commissioner to issue a patent embodying generic claim 11. The District Court, after an evidentiary hearing, dismissed the complaint. Wyman appeals.

¶2

Patent No. 2,049,252, issued to Eberhard July 28, 1936, relating to a valve for use on inner tubes, was cited by the Commissioner. The District Court held Wyman's adaptation of the Eberhard valve structure for use in tubeless tires by making the necessary changes, though it was 'ingenious,' was not the product of the inventive faculty, but of mechanical skill which could have been exercised by any person ordinarily skilled in the art who followed Eberhard's teaching. We agree.

¶3

Affirmed.

/273/f2d/520 · .json · Public domain