Case Name: Application of SCHRAM
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 1925-04-06
Citations: 4 F.2d 958
Docket Number: No. 1726
Parties: Application of SCHRAM.
Judges: Before MARTIN, Chief Justice, and ROBB and VAN ORSDEL, Associate Justices.
Reporter: Federal Reporter 2d Series
Volume: 4
Pages: 958–959

Head Matter:
Application of SCHRAM.
(Court of Appeals of District of Columbia.
Submitted March 10, 1925.
Decided April 6, 1925.)
No. 1726.
Patents <§=>328 — Application for patent for rolled-edge fruit jar cap held anticipated.
Application for patent on rolled-edge screw cap for fruit jar held) anticipated by Redington patent, No. 1,110,646.
Appeal from Commissioner of Patents.
Application for patent by Alexander L. Sehram. Erom a decision of the Patent Office, denying application, applicant appeals.
Affirmed.
J.' S. Barker, of Washington, D. C., for appellant.
T. A. Hostetler, of Washington, D. C., for Commissioner of Patents.
Before MARTIN, Chief Justice, and ROBB and VAN ORSDEL, Associate Justices.

Opinion:
ROBB, Associate Justice.
Appeal from a decision of the Patent Office, refusing four claims covering an alleged invention on a screw cap for a fruit jar.
The claimed novelty consists of "a closely rolled bead formed around the lower edge of said cap, whereby the spreading of the lower edge of the cap, and cutting of the gasket or hands, is prevented, and a more uniform sealing action is obtained." In the other words, appellant has rolled np the lower edge of the old cap, and nothing more. While this change undoubtedly is an improvement over the prior art, it was suggested, as found by the Patent Office, by the patent to Rediugton, No. 1,110,646, which, though differing somewhat from appellant's device, clearly disclosed the idea.
For the reasons more fully stated by the tribunals of the Patent Office, the decision is affirmed.
Affirmed.