SUEHIRO ET AL.

v.

BROWNELL, ATTORNEY GENERAL, SUCCESSOR TO THE ALIEN PROPERTY CUSTODIAN

Citator

Cited By

• Georgia-Pacific Corp. v. United States Plywood Corp., 258 F.2d 124 (2d Cir. 1958)
  …when neither the owners of such prior art patents nor any member of the public after their expiration discovered that their teachings were worth reducing to practice.” Artmoore Co. v. Dayless Mfg. Co., 7 Cir., 1953, 208 F. 2d 1, 4, certiorari denied 347 U.S. 920, 74 S.Ct. 518, 98 L.Ed. 1075. See also Ric-Wil Co. v. E. B. Kaiser Co., 7 Cir., 1950, 179 F. 2d 401, 404, certiorari denied 339 U.S. 958, 70 S.Ct. 981, 94 L.Ed. 1369. The otjier shingle patents were equally ineffective in suggesting that such striat…
• Hobbs v. United States, 451 F.2d 849 (5th Cir. 1971)
  …the patents were not specifically cited by the Patent Office, that the Examiner did not [*864] in fact consider them and cast them aside as less pertinent than those cited. See Artmoore Co. v. Dayless Mfg. Co., 7 Cir. 1953, 208 F. 2d 1, cert. denied 347 U.S. 920, 74 S.Ct. 518, 98 L.Ed. 1075. Third, it has long been settled that, despite apparent similarity to prior art, inventions may be patentable “when they perform different functions or in a different way, or produce a substantially different result.” M…
• Copease Mfg. Co., Inc. v. Am. Photocopy Equip. Co., 298 F.2d 772 (7th Cir. 1961)
  …tablishing invalidity rests on defendants. 35 U.S.C.A. § 282. Helms Products v. Lake Shore Mfg. Co., 7 Cir., 227 F. 2d 677, 680. This presumption is not an idle gesture, Artmoore Company v. Dayless Mfg. Company, 7 Cir., 208 F. 2d 1, 3, cert. denied 347 U.S. 920, 74 S.Ct. 518, 98 L.Ed. 1075, and is not to be overthrown except by clear and cogent evidence. Helms Products v. Lake Shore Mfg. Co., supra, in which we said, at 680 of 227 F. 2d: “The defendant here insists that by reason of the manner in which th…