Legal Opinion

In re Sabatino

Court of Customs and Patent Appeals

Decided July 12, 1973No. Patent Appeal No. 8879PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ALMOND, Senior Judge.

This is an appeal from the decision of the Patent Office Board of Appeals, *912adhered to on reconsideration, affirming the rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 112 of claim 1 of appellants’ application entitled “Storage Battery Construction and Method of Making Same.”1 We affirm that decision.

The application is a continuation of serial No. 132,660, filed August 21, 1961. The earlier application was the subject matter involved in this court’s decision in In re Sabatino, 387 F.2d 981, 55 CCPA 811 (1968).

Claims 1 and 2 were copied from a patent to Frischkorn et al. (Frisehkorn)2 and an…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Edwin J. Smith v. Morris D. StoneCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1970
  2. Application of Anthony Sabatino and Daniel OrlandoCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1968

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Exxon Chemical Patents, Inc., Exxon Corporation and Exxon Research and Engineering Co. v. Lubrizol CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1995
  2. General Electric Co. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1978
  3. GAF Corp. v. Amchem Products, Inc.District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1981
  4. Baran v. MEDICAL DEVICE TECHNOLOGIES, INC.District Court, N.D. Ohio · 2007
  5. Exxon Chemical Patents, Inc., Exxon Corporation and Exxon Research and Engineering Co. v. Lubrizol CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1995

2 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