# In re Dixon

> Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · December 1, 1930 · 44 F.2d 881

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6843734

## Case

- **Full name:** In re DIXON
- **Court:** Court of Customs and Patent Appeals
- **Decided:** December 1, 1930
- **Citations:** 44 F.2d 881
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Opinion of the court by Graham
- **Judges:** Graham
- **Cited by:** 0 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6843734

## Opinion text

GRAHAM, Presiding Judge.
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 § 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.
The decision of the Board of Appeals is affirmed.
Affirmed.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/6843734. Public record. Not legal advice.