Legal Opinion
In Re Draeger
Court of Customs and Patent Appeals
Decided June 25, 1945No. Patent Appeals 5041PublishedCited by 19 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
BLAND, Associate Judge.
From a decision by the Board of Appeals of the United States Patent Office affirming the action of the Primary Examiner in finally rejecting claims 22 to 31, inclusive, of appellants’ application for a patent, on the ground that the claims are not supported by appellants’ application, appeal has been taken here.
Appellants’ application relates to a method for continuously reacting saturated tertiary hydrocarbons and olefins. Claims 22 to 26, inclusive, were copied from the patent to Altshuler et al., No. 2,238,802, issued April IS, 1941. Claims 27 to 31, inclusive,…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Hansgirg v. KemmerCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1939
- Brand v. ThomasCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1938
- Wemple v. PeirceCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1935
- In re CrevelingCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1932
- In re RepogleCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1934
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by19 opinions
- Kropa v. RobieCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1951
- In re WertheimCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1976
- Standard Oil Company v. MontedisonDistrict Court, D. Delaware · 1980
- Application of William G. Baird, Jr., Carl A. Lindstrom, Jr., Arthur L. Besse, Jr., and Donald J. D'EntrEmontCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1965
- Lester C. Crome v. Henton MorroghCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1956
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.