DRUFFEL, District Judge.
After careful consideration of the evidence, including the prior art, together with the authorities submitted by counsel, this court is of opinion and finds as a matter of fact:
(1) That Isett patent No. 1,957,596 is invalid by reason of proven publication of description of method claimed therein more than two years prior to filing date.
(2) That Isett patent No. 2,039,420 is invalid for the reason that Isett was not the original...
Let's get started
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
- Updated daily.
- Uncompromising quality.
- Complete, Accurate, Current.