James Harry Covington
Judge Covington no longer hears cases. This profile is preserved as a historical record of how they ruled.
How Judge Covington decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
He found no prejudicial variance where the opponent proved a later reduction-to-practice date than the one stated in preliminary patent-interference papers.
“Thompson not being harmed by the variance between the date of reduction to practice alleged in the ‘preliminary statement’ of Storrie and the dale, a later one, established in 1he evidence by Storrie”
He tested whether a claimed automobile trademark was descriptive by asking what features a purchaser would expect the product to possess.
“if he were to receive a car containing less than twelve cylinders, he would feel that he had been deceived. This is considered to be the acid test as to the descriptiveness of the term.”
Cautions
He refused to expand trademark legislation to make a descriptive word registrable for additional related goods.
“The Trademark Act cannot be expanded so as to permit a descriptive word to be registered.”
He confined patent-interference analysis to the elements actually written into the claims.
“the oft-repeated rule that claims will he interpreted as drawn.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“Finding no error in the ruling of the court below, the judgment is affirmed, with costs aboye and below. Affirmed.”
“for the reasons assigned in that case the judgment is affirmed, with costs above and below.”
“The decision will he affirmed, and this decision certified.to the Commissioner of Patents. Affirmed.”
“the decision of the Commissioner of Patents is affirmed”
“The decision will he affirmed and this decision certified to the Commissioner of Patents. Affirmed.”
A historical record
Judge Covington no longer hears cases. This profile stays available as a record of how they ruled. If you're preparing for a matter, start from the court's current bench.