Legal Opinion

In re Williford

Court of Customs and Patent Appeals

Decided December 9, 1946No. 5214PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtO’Connell, Judge

This is an appeal from the decision of the Board of Appeals of the United States Patent Office affirming the action of the Primary-Examiner in rejecting claims 24, 25, 26, and 27 in appellant’s application for a patent for “certain new and useful improvements in Accelerated Light Fastness Testing Method and Apparatus.”

Claims 24 and 25, which recite the method, and claims 26 and 27, the apparatus for performing it, were rejected on the ground that they defined no patentable distinction over the disclosure of the art of record. Six claims, 11 to 15, inclusive, and 21, which recite structure,…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. In Re StoverCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1944
  2. Application of SelmiCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1946
  3. In re BrogdenCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1946
  4. In re HerthelCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1946
  5. In re ErnstCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1945

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. In Re SwitzerCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1948
  2. In re HookerCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1949
  3. In re ValkoCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1949
  4. Application of HansenCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1950
  5. Application of HoylerCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1950

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API