Case Name: HOUGHTON v. OOMS, Commissioner of Patents
Court: United States District Court for the District of Columbia
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 1946-06-03
Citations: 155 F.2d 745
Docket Number: No. 9147
Parties: HOUGHTON v. OOMS, Commissioner of Patents.
Judges: 
Reporter: Federal Reporter 2d Series
Volume: 155
Pages: 745–745

Head Matter:
HOUGHTON v. OOMS, Commissioner of Patents.
No. 9147.
United States Court of Appeals District of Columbia.
Argued April 5, 1946.
Decided June 3, 1946.
Mr. David Rines, of Boston, Mass., with whom Mr. Frank W. Dahn, of Washington, D. C., was on the brief, for appellant.
Mr. E. L. Reynolds, of Washington, D. C., with whom Mr. W. W. Cochran, Solicitor, United States Patent Office, of Washington, D. C., was on the brief, for appel-lee.
Before EDGERTON, CLARK and WILBUR K. MILLER, Associate Justices.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
This is a suit under R. S. § 4915, 35 U.S. C. § 63, 35 U.S.C.A. § 63, to obtain a patent. The record supports the District Court's findings that the claims do not distinguish over the prior art except in terms of function, General Electric Co. v. Wabash Appliance Corp., 304 U.S. 364, 58 S.Ct. 899, 82 L.Ed. 1402, Minnesota Mining & Mfg. Co. v. Coe, 72 App.D C. 183, 113 F.2d 512, and that the claims do not define an invention. The judgment dismissing the complaint is therefore affirmed.