Legal Opinion
Application of Selmi
Court of Customs and Patent Appeals
Decided June 11, 1946No. Patent Appeal 5161PublishedCited by 15 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
O’CONNELL, Associate Judge.
This is an appeal from the decision of the Board of Appeals of the United States Patent Office affirming the action of the Primary Examiner in his rejection of claims 5 to 17, inclusive, and 19 in appellants’ application for a patent for alleged “new and useful improvements in Alloy Steel.” Claims 18, 20, 21, and 22 were allowed.
Claims 5 to 12, inclusive, were rejected as unpatentable over the prior art; claims 13 to 17, inclusive, copied from the patent to Fleischmann, No. 2,332,441, for the purpose of interference, were rejected for lack of sufficient disclosure;…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Dow Chemical Co. v. Halliburton Oil Well Cementing Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1945
- In re SwensonCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1942
- In re GreiderCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1942
- In Re LewisCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1938
- In re FischerCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1931
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- In Re W. A. Sheaffer Pen Co.Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1946
- In re BourdonCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1957
- In re EisenhutCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1957
- Application of Stephane Dufaure De LajarteCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1964
- In re WillifordCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1946
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.