In Re Soll
Court of Customs and Patent Appeals
1Opinion of the Court
BLAND, Associate Judge.
Ten claims of appellant’s application for a patent relating to a certain process and product more particularly described hereinafter were allowed by the Primary Examiner of the United States Patent Office, and claims 13 to 25, inclusive, were rejected. Upon appeal to the Board of Appeals, the decision of the examiner was affirmed. After appealing to this court, appellant moved to dismiss the appeal as to claims 22 and 23, which motion will be allowed.
Claims 13, 14, 17, and 21 are illustrative of the remaining appealed claims and follow:
“13. In a process for producing a…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- In Re SteenbockCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1936
- In Re LangmuirCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1932
- In Re WalkerCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1934
- In re BurkCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1935
3Cited by6 opinions
- Application of Robert L. ClarkeCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1966
- Application of Walter Grimme, Werner Keil and Heinrich SchmitzCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1960
- In re ShokalCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1957
- Kraftco Corporation v. Beatrice Foods Co.District Court, D. New Jersey · 1971
- Application of Edward C. Shokal, Paul A. Devlin and Deloss E. WinklerCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1957
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.