338 F.2d 265 - Faulstich v. Ladd — 338 F.2d 265

How this case has been cited

Cited by 55 later decisions — most recently January 2015 · most notably United States v. Sampol (1980), Levin v. Katzenbach (1966)

29 federal appellate · 6 district · 16 state decisions

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

Mr. Ralph D. Dinklage, of the bar of the Court of Appeals of New York, New York City, pro hac vice, by special leave of court, with whom Mr. Martin T. Fisher, Washington, D.C., was on the brief, for appellant.

Mr. George H. Mitchell, Jr., Washington, D.C., also entered an appearance for appellant.

Mr. Joseph Schimmel, Washington, D.C., with whom Mr. Clarence W. Moore, Sol., was on the brief, for appellee.

Before WILBUR K. MILLER, WRIGHT and MCGOWAN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

¶1

These cases came on to be heard on the record on appeals from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, 218 F.Supp. 830, and were argued by counsel.

¶2

ON CONSIDERATION WHEREOF, it is ordered and adjudged by this court that the judgment of the District Court on appeal in these cases is hereby affirmed without prejudice to the reopening of the proceedings before the Patent Office, through any means available, for the purpose of allowing appellant the opportunity to amplify her applications for patents.