Legal Opinion

In re Mead

Court of Customs and Patent Appeals

Decided April 27, 1942No. 4599PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtUenROOt, 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 rejecting claims 9 to 15, inclusive, of appellant’s application for a patent. Eight claims were allowed. Claims 9,10, and 11 are apparatus claims, and claims 12 to 15, inclusive, are for a process.

Claims 9 and 12 illustrate the subject matter involved and read as follows:

9. In a device of the character described,v means to suspend a burial vault in a grave with its upper edge near the surface of the ground and to lower it gradually, removable supports for…

2Cited by6 opinions

  1. Application of Zoltan TARCZYHORNOCHCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1968
  2. In re AshbaughCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1949
  3. Otto Henning v. Scott F. HuntCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1955
  4. Application of Zoltan TARCZYHORNOCHCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1968
  5. Diamond v. DiehrSupreme Court of the United States · 1981

1 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