In re Mays
Court of Customs and Patent Appeals
1Opinion of the Court
Johnson, Judge,
delivered tlie opinion of the court:
This is an appeal from the decision of the Board of Appeals of the United States Patent Office affirming the decision of the Primary Examiner rejecting claims 5, 6, and 7 in appellant’s application for a patent for an invention .relating to the manufacture of metal-bonded abrasive articles. Six claims have been allowed by the Primary Examiner. Claims 5, 6, and 7 were rejected by the Primary Examiner as defining nothing patentable over allowed claim 4 upon which they are dependent.
For the purpose of considering claims 5, 6, and 7, it is deemed…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Holland Furniture Co. v. Perkins Glue Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1928
- Lovell Manufacturing Co. v. CarySupreme Court of the United States · 1893
- Parke-Davis & Co. v. H. K. Mulford Co.U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Southern New York · 1911
- King v. GallunSupreme Court of the United States · 1883
- Baker v. F. A. Duncombe Mfg. Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1906
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Application of LeeCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1951
- Application of FranzCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1951