Legal Opinion
Application of Walter Spormann and Joachim Heinke
Court of Customs and Patent Appeals
Decided July 21, 1966No. Patent Appeal 7599PublishedCited by 26 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
RICH, Acting Chief Judge.
This appeal is from the unanimous decision of the Patent Office Board of Appeals, 1 petition for reconsideration denied, affirming the examiner's rejection of process claims 7 and 8 in application serial No. 56,353, filed September 16, 1960, for “Production of Solid Alkali Sulfites.” No claim has been allowed.
In essence, the invention is a process of producing alkali metal sulfites from alkali metal hydroxides and/or carbonates by spraying the latter, in aqueous solution, into a dry gas containing sulfur dioxide, the temperature and humidity of the gas being such as…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Motion Picture Patents Co. v. Universal Film Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1917
- Application of Carl Arnold and Heinrich BrandtCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1963
- Application of Harold W. AdamsCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1966
3Cited by26 opinions
- W.L. Gore & Associates, Inc., Appellant/cross-Appellee v. Garlock, Inc., Appellee/cross-AppellantCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1983
- Kloster Speedsteel AB v. Crucible Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1986
- Par Pharmaceutical, Inc. v. Twi Pharmaceuticals, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2014
- In re RinehartCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1976
- Kloster Speedsteel Ab v. Crucible Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1986
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.