In re Lillich
Court of Customs and Patent Appeals
1Opinion of the CourtWorley, Judge
This is an appeal from the decision of the Board of Appeals of the United States Patent Office affirming the rejection by the Primary Examiner of claims 1, 2, 3, and 5 of appellant’s application for a patent on a pipe union on the ground of lack of invention over the prior art. Claims 2 and 5 are typical of the appealed claims and read:
2. In a union, a pair of flat faced pipe receiving sections, means for maintaining said sections in abutting relation, a groove in the abutting end face of one of said sections, the mouth of said groove being reduced in width, a rubber O-ring adapted to be…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- In re StattmannCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1944
- In re HeritageCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1946
- In re LippoldCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1949
- In re KingstonCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1945
- In re TaylersonCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1944
3Cited by4 opinions
- The Garrett Corporation v. The United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1970
- Application of Karl E. Prindle and Ross C. ReedCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1962
- Application of Karl E. Prindle and Ross C. ReedCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1962
- The Garrett Corporation v. The United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1970