Opinion

Saunders v. Browne

  • 117 F.2d 547
  • 28 C.C.P.A. 884
  • 48 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 465
  • 1941 CCPA LEXIS 31
Court
Court of Customs and Patent Appeals
Filed
Feb 17, 1941
Status
Published
Author
Gaekett
On the bench
Bland, Gaekett, Garrett, Hatfield, Jackson, Lenroot
Cited by
0 cases

The opinion

Gaekett, P. J.,

specially concurring.

As indicated by my concurrence in the dissenting opinion of Judge Bland in the case of Avery v. Chase, 26 C. C. P. A. (Patents) 823, 836, 101 F. (2d) 205, I am in general agreement with his views respecting the so-called doctrine of estoppel in patent proceedings, and the views which he here expresses upon that subject are in harmony *900 with those there expressed by him, and I again concur in such views.

While I do not regard the discussion of estoppel as being essential to the decision, I realize the case was presented to us in a manner which led the majority to think otherwise, and I make no criticism of their action in that respect. I concur in the conclusion reached upon the merits.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.