Legal Opinion
In Re Reid Harvey
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Decided December 7, 1993No. 92-1564, 93-1064PublishedCited by 51 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
■ MICHEL, Circuit Judge.
Reid Harvey appeals from decisions of the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences (Board) of the Patent and Trademark Office (PTO), which affirmed final rejections of Harvey’s design patent applications, Serial Nos. 07/172,904 (’904) and 07/172,906 (’906). The ornamental designs for vases of the ’904 and ’906 applications were held obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103 (1988). Because we conclude that the Board misapplied the. obviousness standard to the application designs, misconstrued the combined teachings and combinability of the prior art references, and clearly erred…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Litton Systems, Inc. v. Whirlpool CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1984
- Petersen Manufacturing Co., Inc. v. Central Purchasing, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1984
- Thomas A. Gardner v. Tec Systems, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1984
- In Re Phylliss B. MannCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1988
- In re RosenCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1982
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by51 opinions
- Walter E. Durling v. Spectrum Furniture Company, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1996
- High Point Design LLC v. Buyer's Direct, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2013
- In Re Joseph BordenCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1996
- Spigen Korea Co., Ltd. v. Ultraproof, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2020
- Unique Industries, Inc. v. 965207 Alberta Ltd.District Court, District of Columbia · 2011
46 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.