Application of Carl D. Lunsford
Court of Customs and Patent Appeals
1Opinion of the Court
*381HIGH, Judge.
This appeal is from the decision of the Patent Office Board of Appeals affirming the examiner’s rejection of claims 4 and 5 in application serial No. 821,358, filed June 19, 1959, for “Halo-Substi-' tuted Phenoxymethyl Oxazolidones.” No claim is allowed.
The sole issue is obviousness under 35 U.S.C. § 103 in view of the following references :
Beasley et al., Chem. Abstracts, Vol. 51, col. 8723 (1957)1
Karrer, “Organic Chemistry” (Else-vier), pp. 434, 445 (1950)
Noller, “Chem. of Organic Compounds,” 2nd Ed., (Saunders), pp. 440-1 (1957)
Fieser et al., “Organic Chemistry,” (Reinhold),…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Application of Viktor PapeschCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1963
- Application of Harold G. Petering and Harry H. FallCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1962
- Application of Heinrich Ruschig, Walter Aumüller, Gerhard Korger, Hans Wagner, Josef Scholz and Alfred BänderCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1965
- Schering Corporation v. GilbertCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1946
- Application of Arthur D. Lohr and Harold M. SpurlinCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1963
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- In Re Diane M. DillonCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1990
- Commissioner of Patents v. Deutsche Gold-Und-Silber-Scheideanstalt Vormals RoesslerCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1968
- Application of John R. StemniskiCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1971
- In Re John P. ChuppCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1987
- In re MercierCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1975
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.