Legal Opinion

Application of Beauchamp

Court of Customs and Patent Appeals

Decided February 3, 1954No. Patent Appeals 6023PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

O’CONNELL, Judge.

This is an appeal from the decision of the Board of Appeals of the United States Patent Office affirming that of the Primary Examiner who rejected, for lack of invention over the prior art, claims 24-26, 30, 31, and 33-36 of appellant’s application for a patent on certain improvements in metallic doors for railway cars and the method of manufacturing them. No claims were allowed.

The references are: Murphy 1,506,026 Aug. 26, 1924; Eklind et al. 1,745,846 Feb. 4, 1930; McWilliams 1,938,634 Dec. 12, 1933; Ditchfield 2,468,184 Apr. 26, 1949.

Claims 24 and 33 are illustrative and…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. In Re StoverCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1944
  2. In re RosenbergerCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1941
  3. In re MeineckeCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1930

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Maschinenfabrik Rieter A. G. v. Greenwood MillsDistrict Court, D. South Carolina · 1972
  2. Application of George C. MapelsdenCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1964
  3. Tietig v. LaddDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 1964

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API