Introducing ATLASLearn more
Legal Opinion

Application of John Bulina (Deceased) and Jack T. Brown

Court of Customs and Patent Appeals

Decided June 23, 1966No. Patent Appeal 7559PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

SMITH, Judge.

The invention here involved is claimed in appealed claims 1 2, 6 and 7 as a process, in appealed claims 1, 3, 4 and 9 as an alloy, in claims 5 and 11 as a “member” and in claim 12 as a turbine blade. One claim stands allowed.

At the outset there appears to be a substantial question as to the ground or grounds of the rejection on appeal which creates a considerable doubt as to wheth er the rejection has been so stated as to comply with 35 U.S.C. § 132.

This question can be best evaluated against the technical background of the invention in issue. In general, the invention relates to…

Also in this document: Concurrence.

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Graham v. John Deere Co. of Kansas CitySupreme Court of the United States · 1966
  2. United States v. AdamsSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
  3. Tilghman v. ProctorSupreme Court of the United States · 1881
  4. Application of McKennaCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1953
  5. Application of WorrestCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1953

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. In re KronigCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1976
  2. Ralston Purina Co. v. Far-Mar-Co, Inc.District Court, D. Kansas · 1984
  3. In re WafmouthCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1973
  4. In re MengCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1974
  5. In re EcherdCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1973

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

View API DocsGet API Key

Powered by the Exa API