Legal Opinion
Application of Elaine Lustig
Court of Customs and Patent Appeals
Decided December 1, 1966No. Patent Appeal 7672PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
WORLEY, Chief Judge.
Lustig seeks to patent:
The ornamental design for a font of type or the like, substantially as shown.
The application was rejected by the examiner, affirmed by the Board of Appeals, on the ground that appellant’s font was “an obvious modification” of the Smith font.1
*1020The following !e by side comparison clearly supports the decision below:
LUSTIG ABCDEFGH
SMITH ABCDEFGH
LUSTIG IJKLMNOP
SMITH IJKLMNOP
LUSTIG STUVWXYZ
SMITH STUVWXYZ
LUSTIG bcdhiklnopr
SMITH bcdhiklnopr
LUSTIG suvxz 389
SMITH suvxz 389
*1021In her brief here appellant states that
The font of type of the present invention is…
2Cited by3 opinions
- Hadco Products, Inc. v. Walter Kidde & CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1972
- Application of Elaine LustigCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1966
- In re LustigCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1966