273 F. 359 | D.D.C. | 1921
These appeals are from a decision of the Patent Office in an interference case relating to a locking device for
The question involved is one of fact, and a careful study of the record fails to reveal palpable error on the part of the Commissioner. Therefore, following the rule announced in Valerius et al. v. Pfouts, 50 App. D. C. 394, 273 Fed. 358, this day decided, his decision in awarding priority to Moyer is affirmed.
Affirmed.
Mr.-Justice HITZ, of the Supreme Court of the District of Columbia, sat in the place of Mr. Justice ROBB in the hearing and determination of this appeal.