From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Brenner v. Hofstetter

U.S.
Oct 9, 1967
389 U.S. 5 (1967)

Summary

In Hofstetter the mootness resulted from an applicant abandoning a patent application while court review was pending and here it results from a stipulation to withdraw an application to register a trademark.

Summary of this case from Swingline, Inc. v. I.B. Kleinert Rubber Co.

Opinion

CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF CUSTOMS AND PATENT APPEALS.

No. 46.

Decided October 9, 1967.

53 C. C. P. A. (Pat.) 1545, 362 F.2d 293, vacated and remanded with directions to dismiss the appeal as moot.

Solicitor General Marshall, Assistant Attorney General Sanders and Morton Hollander for petitioner.

Paul N. Kokulis and Lawrence A. Hymo for respondent.


Upon consideration of the respondent's suggestion of mootness the judgment is vacated and the case is remanded to the United States Court of Customs and Patent Appeals with directions to dismiss the appeal to that court as moot.

MR. JUSTICE MARSHALL took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.


Summaries of

Brenner v. Hofstetter

U.S.
Oct 9, 1967
389 U.S. 5 (1967)

In Hofstetter the mootness resulted from an applicant abandoning a patent application while court review was pending and here it results from a stipulation to withdraw an application to register a trademark.

Summary of this case from Swingline, Inc. v. I.B. Kleinert Rubber Co.
Case details for

Brenner v. Hofstetter

Case Details

Full title:BRENNER, COMMISSIONER OF PATENTS v . HOFSTETTER

Court:U.S.

Date published: Oct 9, 1967

Citations

389 U.S. 5 (1967)

Citing Cases

Swingline, Inc. v. I.B. Kleinert Rubber Co.

I think none exists. Authority to the contrary in support of the elementary principle that a United States…

Application of Warner

See also In re Dinwiddie, 347 F.2d 1016, 52 CCPA 1693 (the evidence included appellant's "concrete…