green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 1×
6.8 score
G Cite
cited 2× by 1 distinct case, last quoted 1988 ·
…it has been consistently held for many years that it is the appearance of a design as a whole which is controlling in determining questions of patentability and infringement
⚠ not in text
Treatment trajectory · 1960 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1960
1993
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 12 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited "but see"
United States v. Donald Warren Driscoll
But cf. Berry v. United States, 5 Cir. 1959, 271 F.2d 775 , cert, denied, 362 U.S. 903 , 80 S.Ct. 612 , 4 L.Ed.2d 555 ; United States v. Di Pietto, 7 Cir. 1968, 396 F.2d 283 , vacated on other grounds, 394 U.S. 310 , 89 S. Ct. 1163 , 22 L.Ed.2d 297 .
examined
Cited as authority (quoted)
Robert W. Lee D/B/A Rollo-Laxer v. Dayton-Hudson Corporation D/B/A Target Stores and Matrix International, Inc.
(2×)
it has been consistently held for many years that it is the appearance of a design as a whole which is controlling in determining questions of patentability and infringement
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Banfield
See Berry v. United States, 271 F.2d 775, 777 (5th Cir.1959), cert. denied, 362 U.S. 903 , 80 S.Ct. 612 , 4 L.Ed.2d 555 (1960).
discussed
Cited "see"
Keystone Retaining Wall Systems, Inc. v. Westrock, Inc.
(2×)
See Lee v. Dayton-Hudson Corp., 838 F.2d 1186, 1188-89 , 5 USPQ2d 1625, 1627 (Fed.Cir.1988). "[I]t is the appearance of a design as a whole which is controlling in determining questions of patentability and infringement." In re Rubinfield, 270 F.2d 391, 395 , 123 USPQ 210, 214 (CCPA 1959), cert. denied, 362 U.S. 903 , 80 S.Ct. 611 , 4 L.Ed.2d 554 (1960).
discussed
Cited "see"
KeyStone Retaining Wall Systems, Inc. v. Westrock, Inc.
(2×)
See Lee v. Dayton-Hudson Corp., 838 F.2d 1186, 1188-89 , 5 USPQ2d 1625, 1627 (Fed.Cir.1988). “[I]t is the appearance of a design as a whole which is controlling in determining questions of patentability and infringement.” In re Rubinfield, 270 F.2d 391, 395 , 123 USPQ 210, 214 (CCPA 1959), cert. denied, 362 U.S. 903 , 80 S.Ct. 611 , 4 L.Ed.2d 554 (1960).
discussed
Cited "see"
Bankord v. DeRock
(2×)
See Waynick v. Chicago’s Last Department Store, 269 F.2d 322 (7th Cir. 1959), cert. denied, 362 U.S. 903 , 80 S.Ct. 611 , 4 L.Ed.2d 554 (1960); Butler v. Wittland, 18 Ill.App.2d 578 , 153 N.E.2d 106 (1958); Eldredge v. Don Beachcomber, Inc., 342 Ill.App. 151 , 95 N.E.2d 512 (1950).
discussed
Cited "see"
Blake Construction Company, Inc. v. Laborers' International Union of North America, Afl-Cio
See United Packinghouse Workers v. Maurer-Neuer, Inc., 272 F.2d 647 (10th Cir. 1959), cert. denied, 362 U.S. 904 , 80 S.Ct. 611 , 4 L.Ed.2d 555 (1960); Consolidation Coal Co. v. UMW Local 6869, supra note 34 ; United States Steel Corp. v. UMW, 77 L.R.R.M. 3134 (E.D.Ky.1971); United States Steel Corp. v. UMW, 320 F.Supp. 743 (W.D.Pa.1970).
examined
Cited "see"
Currie v. Fiting
(4×)
See how Stout v. Keyes was employed to such specific end in Waynick v. Chicago’s Last Department Store (CCA 7), 269 F2d 322 (77 ALE2d 1260), certiorari denied 362 US 903 ( 80 S Ct 611 , 4 L ed 2d 554).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Sun Hill Industries v. Easter Unlimited
(2×)
Gorham, 81 U.S. (14 Wall.) at 530 [ 20 L.Ed. 731 ]; Power Controls, 806 F.2d at 239 -40 ...; see also In re Rubinfield, 270 F.2d 391, 395 , 123 USPQ 210, 214 (CCPA 1959), cert. denied, 362 U.S. 903 , 80 S.Ct. 611 , 4 L.Ed.2d 554 (1960) ("It has been consistently held for many years that it is the appearance of a design as a whole which is controlling in determining questions of patentability and infringement.”).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Kleeblatt v. Business News Publishing Co.
(2×)
See also Waynick v. Chicago’s Last Department Store, 269 F.2d 322, 325 (7th Cir.1959), cert. denied, 362 U.S. 903 , 80 S.Ct. 611 , 4 L.Ed.2d 554 (1960).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Largo Corp. v. Crespin
(2×)
See, e.g., Waynick v. Chicago’s Last Department Store, 269 F.2d 322, 325 (7th Cir.1959) (a statute forbidding the sale of alcohol to an intoxicated person exists for the protection of any member of the public who might be injured or damaged as a result of the drunkenness to which the particular sale of alcohol contributes), cert. denied, 362 U.S. 903 , 80 S.Ct. 611 , 4 L.Ed.2d 554 (1960); Vance v. United States, 355 F.Supp. 756, 759 (D.Alaska 1973) (a statute prohibiting the sale of liquor to an intoxicated person is designed at least in part to protect against personal injuries caused by in…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Village of Brooten, a Municipal Corporation v. Cudahy Packing Company, a Corporation, and the Travelers Indemnity Company, a Corporation
(2×)
Compare Waynick v. Chicago’s Last Department Store, 7 Cir., 269 F.2d 322, 326 , certiorari denied Saxner v. Waynick, 362 U.S. 903 , 80 S.Ct. 611 , 4 L.Ed.2d 554 ; Rappaport v. Nichols, 31 N.J. 188 , 156 A.2d 1, 8-9 ; Anderson v. Settergren, 100 Minn. 294 , 111 N.W. 279 .
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Rubenfield
v.
Watson, Commissioner of Patents
v.
Watson, Commissioner of Patents
No. 622.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Feb 29, 1960.
Bruce B. Krost for petitioner., Solicitor General Rankin, Assistant Attorney General Doub and Samuel D. Slade for respondent.
Published
Citer courts: Federal Circuit (2)
United States Court of Customs and Patent Appeals. Certiorari denied.