Legal Opinion
In Re Richter
Court of Customs and Patent Appeals
Decided December 7, 1931No. Patent Appeal 2834PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
GARRETT, Associate Judge.
Appellant seeks patent on “Improvements in Wood Pulp- and Process of Producing the Same.” There are eight claims, Nos. 2-8, inclusive, and No. 11. Their rejection by the examiner was affirmed by the Board of Appeals of the United States Patent Office, and the instant appeal is from the decision of the latter..Claims 2, 3, and 11- are for the -process, and the others are- for the article.
We quote Nos. 2, 4,-and 8:
“2. A process of producing -wqqd pulp, which comprises the digestion of the raw eellulosie material in an acid sulphite cooking liquor, in whieh the free SO2…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Smith v. NicholsSupreme Court of the United States · 1875
- Minerals Separation, Ltd. v. HydeSupreme Court of the United States · 1916
- Steel Wheel Corp. v. B. F. Goodrich Rubber Co.District Court, E.D. Michigan · 1928
- In re PillingCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1930
- In Re WilliamsCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1929
3Cited by6 opinions
- California Research Corporation v. David L. Ladd, Commissioner of PatentsCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1966
- Midland Flour Milling Co. v. BobbittCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1934
- In re BourdonCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1957
- Application of Arthur P. ShepardCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1963
- De Cew v. Union Bag & Paper Corp.District Court, D. New Jersey · 1945
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.