In re Derleth
Court of Customs and Patent Appeals
1Opinion of the CourtLeNeoot, Judge
This is an appeal from a decision of the Board of Appeals of the United States Patent Office affirming a decision of the examiner rejecting, upon various grounds hereinafter discussed, claims 1, 2, 4, 5, 7, 8, and 10 to 13, inclusive, of appellant’s application for a patent.
Claims 1, 2, and 10 are typical of the rejected claims and read as follows:
1. A plastic mass containing hydrating cement and fly ash.
2. A concrete comprising hydrating cement, aggregate, fly ash and water.
10. As a blended cement,' a dry mixture of Portland cement and fly ash.
The references cited are:
Fels, 1,419,665, June…
2Cited by6 opinions
- In Re Charles H. Kroekel and Frederick A. PfaffCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1986
- Application of WalkerCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1954
- Application of David BandelCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1965
- Application of TankeCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1954
- Application of David BandelCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1965
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.