Introducing ATLASLearn more
Legal Opinion

Application of Andre Jan Conix and Urbain Leopold Laridon

Court of Customs and Patent Appeals

Decided January 23, 1969No. Patent Appeal 8062PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

BALDWIN, Judge.

This appeal is from the Patent Office Board of Appeals decision affirming the rejection of claims 16, 17, 19, and 20 of appellants’ application 1 on the ground of double patenting. Claims 1, 21, 22, and 23 stand allowed.

The issue in this appeal relates to an “obviousness” type “double patenting” rejection wherein no terminal disclaimer has been filed and wherein the appealed claims and the patent claims are mutually exclusive.

The present invention relates to the formation of high molecular weight linear aromatic polyesters of the polysulfonate type. More particularly, the…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Application of Max O. RobesonCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1964
  2. Application of Christian Zickendraht and Arthur BuehlerCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1963
  3. In re OckertCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1957
  4. In re WardCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1956
  5. Application of Howard G. RogersCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1968

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. In re GlassCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1973

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

View API DocsGet API Key

Powered by the Exa API