Legal Opinion

Application of Williams

Court of Customs and Patent Appeals

Decided December 7, 1948No. Patent Appeal 5513PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

HATFIELD, Judge.

This-is an appeal from the decision of the Board of Appeals of the United States Patent Office affirming the decision of the Primary Examiner rejecting claim 2 in appellant’s application for a patent on a lac-tone. The method claims by which the lactone, called for in appealed claim 2, may be produced, were allowed by the examiner.

The appealed claim reads as follows: “2.® The laevo rotary form of «-hydroxy- Bt B -dimethyl- y-butyro lactone substantially free from the dextro rotary form.”

The following references were relied on by the Patent Office tribunals:

Monatschefte fur…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. In Re MerzCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1938
  2. Farbenfabriken of Elberfeld Co. v. KuehmstedU.S. Circuit Court for the Northern District of Illnois · 1909

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Application of Joseph D. FisherCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1970
  2. In re MayCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1978
  3. Application of KebrichCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1953
  4. Application of Sune Bergstrom and Jan SjovallCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1970
  5. Application of Kenneth B. CoferCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1966

8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API