In re Eitzen

Appellant has filed in the United States Patent Office an application for patent entitled “For Tape Printing and Projecting Apparatus.”

Twelve claims were allowed, but the examiner rejected claims 13, 14, 15, and 16 upon the ground that the same lacked patentability in view of the prior art. Upon appeal the Board of Appeals affirmed the decision of the examiner rejecting' said claims, and from such decision of the board this appeal was taken.

Claim 13 is illustrative of the claims before us and reads as,follows:

13. Projecting apparatus of tlie character described comprising a single source of…