Legal Opinion

In Re Hawkins

Court of Customs and Patent Appeals

Decided April 4, 1932No. Patent Appeal 2927PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

LENROOT, Associate Judge.

This is an appeal from a decision of the Board of Appeals of the United States Patent Office, affirming a decision of the Primary Examiner, requiring a division as between allowed claims 10, 11, and 12, and claims 13 and 14 of appellant’s application, filed May 2, 1028. Said claims 13 and 14 were not passed upon as to their merits by either of the Patent Office tribunals, but the requirement for division was technically a final rejection of such claims, and therefore we have jurisdiction to entertain this appeal. In re Rundell, 55 F.(2d) 450, 452, 19 C. C. P. A.-.

Claim…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Leeds & Catlin Co. v. Victor Talking MacHine Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1909
  2. Gill v. WellsSupreme Court of the United States · 1874
  3. In Re RundellCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1932

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Application of ColemanCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1951
  2. Application of Leo L. HengeholdCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1971
  3. In Re CadyCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1935
  4. In Re FerenciCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1936
  5. Application of HornemanCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1952

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