Legal Opinion
In Re Farrand
Court of Customs and Patent Appeals
Decided May 27, 1931No. Patent Appeal 2760PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
GARRETT, Associate Judge.
This is an appeal from a decision of the Board of Appeals of the United States Patent Office, affirming a decision of the examiner, rejecting six claims in an application for patent on alleged new and useful improvements in sound control apparatus. Two claims were allowed. Of those rejected, No. 14 seems fairly representative: “14. A loudspeaker comprising a support, a dia^ phragm mounted in said support, said diaphragm comprising a large direeUaeting cone and a flexible rim connecting the edge of the cone to the support and forming with the walls of the cone an…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Loom Co. v. HigginsSupreme Court of the United States · 1882
- Diamond Rubber Co. of New York v. Consolidated Rubber Tire Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1911
- Hailes v. Van WormerSupreme Court of the United States · 1874
- Expanded Metal Co. v. BradfordSupreme Court of the United States · 1909
- Thatcher Heating Co. v. BurtisSupreme Court of the United States · 1887
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Coltman v. Colgate-Palmolive-Peet Co.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1939
- Sharp v. CoeCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1941
- Application of JurgeleitCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1952
- Utah Radio Products Co. v. BoudetteDistrict Court, D. Massachusetts · 1934