Legal Opinion

In Re Langmuir

Court of Customs and Patent Appeals

Decided December 19, 1932No. Patent Appeal 3037PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

GARRETT, Associate Judge.

Sixteen claims of appellant’s application for patent upon claimed “Improvements in Heating Process and Apparatus” were rejected by the Examiner, whose decision was affirmed by the Board of Appeals of the United States Patent Office. From the decision of the latter, the instant appeal was taken.

Seven claims stand allowed, and the appeal as to claim No. 6 is “no longer urged.”

-Of the apparatus claims at issue, No. 10 is quoted as representative:

“10. A heating apparatus comprising the combination of means for thermally dissociating hydrogen and means for directing a…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Union Switch & Signal Co. v. Kodel Electric & Manufacturing Co.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 1932
  2. In re MarshallCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1931

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. In Re SteenbockCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1936
  2. Kyrides v. AndersenCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1941
  3. Unifund C.C.R. Partners v. Sheckard (In Re Schekard)District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 2008
  4. In Re SollCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1938
  5. In Re WalkerCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1934

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