[JUDICIAL ERROR - PRINTED MATTER] In re Dixon (44 F.2d 881, 1 December 1930)

Decision Parameters

Decisions It Cites Decisions That Cite It
Rules & Quotes
[PRINTED MATTER] {1} The appellant has prepared a form of a promissory judgment note with attorney's fee clause, and a declaration of lien written therein, and seeks to patent it under application, serial No. 123,682, filed July 20, 1926. Both the Examiner and the Board of Appeals rejected the application on the ground that the alleged invention did not constitute a new and useful art, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvements thereof, as required by section 4886, Rev. St. (35 USCA ยง 31). We are in entire accord with the decisions of the Patent Office tribunals. The law is well settled by Hotel Security, etc., v. Lorraine Co (C.C.A.) 160 F. 467, 24 L.R.A. (N.S.) 665; Berardini v. Tocci (C.C.A.) 200 F. 1021; Moore v. United States, 50 Ct. Cl. 120; In re Moeser, 27 App. D.C. 307.

[PRINTED MATTER] The case of Hotel Security involved issues of novelty and description, not functionality or utility of printed matter, and thus is not a citable precedent to establish a printed-matter doctrine.


Review Articles and Papers

Brief Comments and Observations

JSON Specification