Legal Opinion
Application of Edward M. Rothermel and Russell B. Waddell, Jr
Court of Customs and Patent Appeals
Decided March 30, 1960No. Patent Appeal 6470PublishedCited by 30 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
SMITH, Judge.
This appeal is from the decision of the Board of Appeals, affirming the examiner’s rejection of claims 15 through 20, in appellants’ application Serial No. 496,-507, filed March 24, 1955. No claims have been allowed. The application is a continuation in part of application Serial No. 398,126, filed December 14, 1953, and of application Serial No. 448,722, filed August 9, 1954.
The invention relates to reinforced, flexible conduits of the type commonly used as vacuum cleaner hose which must be relatively light weight and flexible. Use of a relatively thin, pliable conduit gives…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Eibel Process Co. v. Minnesota & Ontario Paper Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1923
- Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. v. Ray-O-Vac Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1944
- Application of McKennaCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1953
- In re GardinerCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1948
- In re BourdonCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1957
3Cited by30 opinions
- Studebaker Corporation v. Richard D. GittlinCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1966
- Northern Telecom, Inc. v. Datapoint Corporation, Defendant/cross-AppellantCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1990
- Gilbert Shaw and Polymers, Inc. v. E. B. & A. C. Whiting CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1969
- Application of Philip v. Palmquist and James v. ErwinCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1963
- In re WesslauCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1965
25 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.