[LB051769], Telephone Message from Alfred Ord Tate to Thomas Alva Edison, December 9th, 1891
https://edisondigital.rutgers.edu/document/LB051769
→ View document with UniversalViewer
→ View document on Archive.org
→ Re-use this digital object via a IIIF manifest
Title
[LB051769], Telephone Message from Alfred Ord Tate to Thomas Alva Edison, December 9th, 1891
Author
Recipient
Date
1891-12-09
Type
Subject
Folder/Volume ID
LB051-F
Microfilm ID
142:683
Document ID
LB051769
Publisher
Thomas A. Edison Papers, School of Arts and Sciences, Rutgers University
Has Version
Item sets
Transcription
<768/774>
Letterhead of Edison General Electric Co.
CONFIRMATION OF MESSAGE.
Name of Person Sending Name of Person Receiving Time Date
D.M. Matthew Smith 2.45 I2/1891
From whom received: Mr. A.O. Tate, Private Secretary.
To whom sent: Mr. Thomas A. Edison, Ogden.
Mr. Swan has been here this morning and wishes to get some information in regard to the progress which Screll is making the patent office. It appears that the Western Union people have declared their intention to appeal from the first decision of the examiner which we now know will be rejection. The law requires that before an appeal is taken, the examiner shall be asked to reconsider. Screll is afraid that they are going to appeal direct from the first decision and neglect this latter point regarding reconsideration which might destroy the case in a higher court. Have I authority to obtain all possible information from Screll to advise Swan fully thereof.
A.O. Tate
Letterhead of Edison General Electric Co.
CONFIRMATION OF MESSAGE.
Name of Person Sending Name of Person Receiving Time Date
D.M. Matthew Smith 2.45 I2/1891
From whom received: Mr. A.O. Tate, Private Secretary.
To whom sent: Mr. Thomas A. Edison, Ogden.
Mr. Swan has been here this morning and wishes to get some information in regard to the progress which Screll is making the patent office. It appears that the Western Union people have declared their intention to appeal from the first decision of the examiner which we now know will be rejection. The law requires that before an appeal is taken, the examiner shall be asked to reconsider. Screll is afraid that they are going to appeal direct from the first decision and neglect this latter point regarding reconsideration which might destroy the case in a higher court. Have I authority to obtain all possible information from Screll to advise Swan fully thereof.
A.O. Tate