Legal Opinion

Application of Leslie Frederick Wiggins

Court of Customs and Patent Appeals

Decided October 10, 1968No. Patent Appeal 7864PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

CLARK, Associate Justice.

This appeal is from the decision of the Board of Appeals which affirmed the examiner’s rejection of claims 13-15 in appellant’s application 1 as unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103 in view of a literature article by Wolf and Braun (Wolf). 2 After careful consideration of “the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue,” Graham v. John Deere Co., 383 U.S. 1, 17, 86 S.Ct. 684, 694, 15 L.Ed.2d 545 (1966), taken as a whole and specifically in light of the teachings of Wolf, we conclude that appellant’s claims comply with the conditions for patentability set…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Graham v. John Deere Co. of Kansas CitySupreme Court of the United States · 1966
  2. United States v. AdamsSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
  3. In Re ThuauCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1943
  4. In re HackCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1957
  5. Application of Kenneth B. CoferCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1966

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Trio Process Corporation, in No. 71-1295 v. L. Goldstein's Sons, Inc., in No. 71-1296Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1972
  2. In re AntonieCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1977
  3. Application of William C. AnthonyCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1969
  4. Carter-Wallace, Inc. v. Davis-Edwards Pharmacal Corp.District Court, E.D. New York · 1972
  5. Application of Robert R. Mod, Evald L. Skau, Sara P. Fore, Frank C. Magne, Arthur F. Novak, Harold P. Dupuy, Jesse R. Ortego, and Mary J. FisherCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1969

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