Skip to main content
· 12/19/1930

In Re Ackenbach

Citations

  • 45 F.2d 437
  • 18 C.C.P.A. 769

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • “if a previously patented device, in its normal and usual operation, will perform the function which an appellant claims in a subsequent application for process patent, then such application for process patent will be considered to have been anticipated by the former patented- device”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Graham, Bland, Hatfield, Garrett, Lenroot

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.