Legal Opinion
In Re Rundell
Court of Customs and Patent Appeals
Decided February 8, 1932No. Patent Appeal 2821PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
GRAHAM, Presiding Judge.
The appellant filed hisl application in the United States Patent Office for a patent on certain improvements in a machine for crimping plastic caps on bottles. A large number of claims were attached to the application, many of whieh wrere allowed by the Examiner, and claims 1 to 5, 8, 10 to 24, 29, 32 to 35, 37, 39 to 48, 51, 53, 54, and 80 were rejected. The Examiner also required division between claims 55 to 64, inclusive, and 72 to 79, inclusive, and the remaining claims.
On appeal, the Board of Appeals affirmed the decision of the Examiner as to his rejection of…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Expanded Metal Co. v. BradfordSupreme Court of the United States · 1909
- Leeds & Catlin Co. v. Victor Talking MacHine Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1909
- Gill v. WellsSupreme Court of the United States · 1874
- United States Ex Rel. Steinmetz v. AllenSupreme Court of the United States · 1904
- Badische Anilin & Soda Fabrik v. A. Klipstein & Co.U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York · 1903
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- In Re CadyCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1935
- In Re FerenciCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1936
- In Re HawkinsCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1932
- Oswego Falls Corp. v. American Seal-Kap Corp.District Court, E.D. New York · 1946
- In Re PedersenCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1934
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.