Legal Opinion
Application of Arthur v. Hughes
Court of Customs and Patent Appeals
Decided May 20, 1965No. Patent Appeal 7312PublishedCited by 24 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
SMITH, Judge.
Claims 1-16 of appellant’s application1 stand rejected, and the threshold question is, on what ground? Neither the examiner nor the Board of Appeals specified the statutory basis for the rejection.
In concluding its opinion, the board stated: “we deem claims 1 through 16 to be unpatentable over Link2 and accordingly, the rejection of the claims will be sustained.” The solicitor takes the position that this holding constitutes reliance upon 35 U.S.C. § 103, and in this connection states:
“Even if the examiner’s rejection were deemed limited to 35 U.S.C. 102, the Board’s reliance on…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Application of Douglas H. MoretonCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1961
- Application of William A. SheppardCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1964
- Application of Joseph D. TurlayCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1962
- Application of Earl E. FolkenrothCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1960
3Cited by24 opinions
- Wasica Finance GmbH v. Continental Automotive Systems, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2017
- Application of Rudolf WiechertCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1967
- Arthur W. Chester, Albert B. Schwartz and William A. Stover v. Stephen J. Miller and Keith C. BishopCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1990
- In re LudtkeCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1971
- Pfizer, Inc. v. LeeCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2016
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.