Application of Philip v. Palmquist and James v. Erwin
Court of Customs and Patent Appeals
1Opinion of the Court
SMITH, Judge.
Appellant has appealed from a decision of the Board of Appeals which affirmed the examiner’s rejection of all of the claims (claims 1-8) of appellants’ application Serial No. 434,323, filed June 3, 1954, entitled “Protective Reflective Film.” All the appealed claims were rejected on two grounds: (1) as unpatentable over the prior art and (2) on the ground of double patenting,
The references relied upon are:
Groten et al. 2,459,739 Jan. 18, 1949
Keithly 2,703,772 March 8, 1955 (Filed Sept. 12,1952)
Bosch (German) [720,980] Aprl. 16, 1942 (page 2, lines 3-27)
Clauser, “Metal Coated…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Hotchkiss v. GreenwoodSupreme Court of the United States · 1851
- Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. v. Ray-O-Vac Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1944
- Krementz v. S. Cottle Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1893
- Application of Edward M. Rothermel and Russell B. Waddell, JrCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1960
- Application of Herbert C. Murray and Durey H. PetersonCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1959
3Cited by22 opinions
- Application of Frederick C. FosterCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1965
- Argus Chemical Corporation v. Fibre Glass-Evercoat Company, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1985
- Frantz Manufacturing Company, and v. Phenix Manufacturing Company, Inc., AndCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1972
- Dix-Seal Corporation v. New Haven Trap Rock CompanyDistrict Court, D. Connecticut · 1964
- Allen-Bradley Company v. Air Reduction CompanyDistrict Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 1967
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.