Legal Opinion
Application of Gordon Henry Cook and Peter Arnold Merigold
Court of Customs and Patent Appeals
Decided July 1, 1971No. Patent Appeal 8446PublishedCited by 29 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
RICH, Judge.
This appeal is from the decision of the Patent Office Board of Appeals affirming the examiner’s rejection of claims 1-27 in appellants’ application serial No. 309,208, filed September 16, 1963, for “Optical Objectives of Variable Equivalent Focal Length Having Two Divergent Members For Zooming Purposes.” We affirm.
THE INVENTION
The rejected claims are for an allegedly improved version of a particular kind of “optical objective of the ‘zoom’ type.” In common parlance, an optical objective is called a lens. A “zoom” lens assembly is one in which the focal length, and consequently the…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Graver Tank & Mfg. Co. v. Linde Air Products Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1949
- Application of Charles D. Prater and James WeiCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1969
- Application of Joseph D. FisherCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1970
- Application of Walter L. Borkowski and John J. Van VenrooyCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1970
- In re SarettUnited States Customs Court · 1964
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by29 opinions
- Atlas Powder Company v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Company and Alamo Explosives Company, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1984
- Crown Operations International, Ltd. And Marshall H. Krone v. Solutia Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2002
- Spectra-Physics, Inc., Appellee/cross-Appellant v. Coherent, Inc., Appellant/crossCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1987
- In re SmytheCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1973
- Maurice A. Garbell, Inc. v. Boeing CompanyDistrict Court, C.D. California · 1973
24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.