Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

350 F.2d 787

Docket No. 19105.

Eckel v. Ladd

District of Columbia Circuit Court of Appeals

June 3, 1965.

Petition for Rehearing Denied June 28, 1965.

Certiorari Denied November 8, 1965.

District of Columbia Circuit Court of Appeals · decided 1965-06-03

Cited by 2 later decisions — most recently February 1974

1 federal appellate ·

2 counsel of record

Relies on Zenith Radio Corp. v. Ladd · Eckel v. Ladd

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Opinion by Per Curiam · Decided 1965-06-03

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

See 86 S.Ct. 243.

Mr. William Douglas Sellers, Pasadena, Cal., with whom Messrs. George A. Brace, Pasadena, Cal., and Munson H. Lane, Washington, D. C., were on the brief, for appellant.

Mr. S. William Cochran, Atty., U. S. Patent Office, with whom Mr. Clarence W. Moore, Sol., U. S. Patent Office, was on the brief, for appellee.

Before PRETTYMAN, Senior Circuit Judge, and WRIGHT and TAMM, Circuit Judges.

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

¶1

This cause came on to be heard on the record on appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, and was argued by counsel.

¶2

This court being in general agreement with the opinion filed herein by the District Court, Eckel v. Ladd, D.D.C., 233 F.Supp. 879 (1964); 1438(1).

¶3

It is ordered that the judgment of the District Court be, and it is hereby, affirmed. See Zenith Radio Corporation v. Ladd, 114 U.S.App.D.C. 54, 57, 310 F.2d 859, 862 (1962).

/350/f2d/787 · .json · Public domain