Application of David W. Wilson
Court of Customs and Patent Appeals
1Opinion of the Court
LANE, Judge.
This appeal is from the decision of the Patent Office Board of Appeals, which affirmed the rejection of claims 1-4, 8-10, and 15-21 in appellant’s application serial No. 332,321, filed November 5, 1963, for “Treated Brush and Brush Treating Composition.” Four other claims have been allowed. We conclude that the board’s decision must be reversed.
THE DISCLOSURE
Appellant’s disclosure discusses certain problems in the treatment of power-driven rotary brushes. According to the disclosure, it was desirable to pro duce a composition for treating the brush bristles, whereby the ability of…
2Cited by4 opinions
- In re MillerCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1971
- Canady v. Erbe Elektromedizin GmbHDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 1998
- Curtiss-Wright Flow Control Corp. v. Z & J Technologies GmbHDistrict Court, C.D. California · 2007
- In Re Leonard M. GreeneCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1994