In re Aiken

Citations

• 1 MacA. Pat. Cas. 126
• 1 F. Cas. 226

Syllabus

<p>Reasons of appeal — sufficiency of. — It is immaterial what reasons the Commissioner assigns for his decision. His reasons may be insufficient, and yet the decision may be correct. Such insufficient reasons are no ground for revising his decision.</p> <p>Anticipation — novelty—comparative utility. — Upon the sufficiency of references, the question is not whether the applicant’s invention is more useful than others, but whether it is new and sufficiently useful to justify a patent.</p> <p>Board of examiners — duties of the examiners. — The examiners in the Patent Office are the assistants of the Commissioner in the discharge of his duties, but the Commissioner cannot transfer to them, or any of them, his own power to decide. The examination of the alleged invention required by the seventh section of the law of 1836 may be made by the Commissioner alone, or with the aid of such examiners as he may assign for that purpose, but he cannot constitute them a 11 board of examiners,” known to the law as such.</p> <p>Ssi — section 12 op the act op 1839. — The provisions of the act of 1836 relating to a board of examiners were repealed by the twelfth section of the act of 1839.</p>