Application of Campbell
Court of Customs and Patent Appeals
1DissentO’Connell, Judge
The Solicitor for the Patent Office properly concedes in his brief that if the application at bar is a true division of appellant’s parent application, No. 687,-115, his affidavit under Rule 131 effectively removes the reference “American Helicopter” from the proceeding.
That reference was evidently relied upon by the tribunals of the Patent Office to bolster their rejection of appellant’s claim solely on the ground that it was un-patentable over the design disclosed by the patent to Lewis.
It is my conviction after a careful analysis of the facts presented by the record and the long array of…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Hartford-Empire Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
- Chapman v. WintroathSupreme Court of the United States · 1920
- Dwight & Lloyd Sintering Co. v. GreenawaltCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1928
- Godfrey v. EamesSupreme Court of the United States · 1864
- International Standard Electric Corp. v. KingslandCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1948
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.