Legal Opinion
Application of George E. Linnert and Ronald H. Espy
Court of Customs and Patent Appeals
Decided November 14, 1962No. Patent Appeal 6835PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
SMITH, Judge.
Appellants have appealed from a decision of the Board of Appeals which affirmed the examiner’s rejection of claims 1 through 7, inclusive, of appellants’ application for patent 1 for “Stainless Steel and Article.” No claims were allowed.
Claims 2 and 6 are illustrative and are as follows:
“2. Stainless steel possessing precipitation-hardening and good welding characteristics consisting essentially of chromium 16.00% to 18.00%, nickel 6.50% to 7.75%, aluminum .75% to 1.50%, carbon .09% maximum, at least one of the group consisting of titanium about .05% to .20%, zirconium about .10%…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Eibel Process Co. v. Minnesota & Ontario Paper Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1923
- Application of Philip A. Shaffer, JrCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1956
- Application of Edward M. Rothermel and Russell B. Waddell, JrCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1960
- Becket v. CoeCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1938
- Application of John O. AntonsonCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1959
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Solder Removal Co. v. United States International Trade CommissionCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1978
- In re SponnobleCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1969
- In re NomiyaCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1975
- Holley v. OUTBOARD MARINE CORPORATIONDistrict Court, N.D. Illinois · 1964
- Application of Harry SponnobleCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1969
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.