Re Harbeck
Citations
- 39 App. D.C. 555
- 1913 U.S. App. LEXIS 2035
Syllabus
<p>Patents; Novelty; Utility.</p> <p>1. Where the question of patentability is close, the doubt should be resolved in favor of the applicant. (Following In re Eastwood, 33 App. D. C. 291.)</p> <p>2, While the use of new materials to produce a known result, or of known materials to produce a new but obvious result, may not always eonstitute invention, if the new idea, when applied, brings success out of failure, produces a new and useful result, and saving in operation or production, or efficiency instead of inefficiency, gives to the device new functions and useful properties, it is invention, and patentable.</p> <p>3. A paper vessel, the walls of which are formed of layers of paper held together by a fused cement, and are impervious to gases or moisture, constitutes a patentable invention.</p>
Judges: Orsdel
Read full opinion on CourtListenerSourced 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.