Legal Opinion

Application of Ernst-Albrecht Pieroh and Horst Werres

Court of Customs and Patent Appeals

Decided June 28, 1963No. Patent Appeal 6972PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

SMITH, Judge.

This is an appeal from a decision of the Board of Appeals affirming the examiner’s rejection of claims 1-9 of appellants’ application1 entitled “Soil Disinfectants and Method of Applying Same”. No claims have been allowed.

Appellants have requested that claim 10 submitted in a proposed amendment filed July 21, 1958 be considered by the court “pro hac vice.” The proposed amendment, which is not in the record, was refused admission by the examiner, was not considered by the board, and therefore, according to our established practice will not be considered here. In re Wiedman, 243…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Old Town Ribbon & Carbon Co. v. Columbia Ribbon & Carbon Mfg. Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1947
  2. Application of Joseph R. Riden, Jr., and James P. FlavinCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1963
  3. Application of Victor MillsCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1960
  4. Ball & Roller Bearing Co. v. F. C. Sanford Mfg. Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1924
  5. Application of Jan RosickyCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1960

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Application of Ernst-Albrecht Pieroh and Horst WerresCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1963
  2. Application of Lars RingdalCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1963

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API