35 U.S.C. § 266

Repealed. Pub. L. 89–83, § 8, July 24, 1965, 79 Stat. 261]

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 35 CasesGoogle Scholar

[repealed]

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3 cases, 1944–1961 · leading case: Parmelee Pharm. Co., & William v. Consolazio v. Lawrence C. Zink, D/B/A Zink Saf. Equip. Co., 285 F.2d 465 (8th Cir. 1961).
Parmelee Pharm. Co., & William v. Consolazio v. Lawrence C. Zink, D/B/A Zink Saf. Equip. Co., 285 F.2d 465 (8th Cir. 1961). “In accord with the provision» of 35 U.S.C.A. § 266 the Government is given a royalty-free license by a recital in the patent itself.”
Chester R. Shook, Adm'r of the Est. of Alfred Russell, Deceased v. The United States of Am., 238 F.2d 952 (6th Cir. 1956). “However, this statement made in conformity to 35 U.S.C. § 266 , formerly Section 45, was required in order to authorize the granting of a patent without the payment of fees by a government employee.”
McCurrach v. Cheney Bros., 59 F. Supp. 234 (S.D.N.Y. 1944). “§ 4918, 35 U.S.C.A. § 266 . (b) The third new cause of action alleges that the defendant’s patent is not infringed, is invalid and a declaratory judgment is sought.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.