Legal Opinion

In re Coleman

Court of Customs and Patent Appeals

Decided February 15, 1973No. Patent Appeal No. 8831PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

LANE, Judge.

This appeal is from the decision of the Patent Office Board of Appeals, adhered to on reconsideration, affirming the examiner’s final rejection of claims 1-3, 6-13, and 15-18 of appellant’s application1 entitled “Flexible Conduit” as failing to satisfy the requirements of 35 U.S.C. § 112. We reverse.

The claims on appeal are drawn to a flexible conduit comprising a strip-wound metal hose encased in a seamless plastic jacket and its method of manufacture. The plastic jacket is extruded onto the hose, and a problem which arises is the penetration of the plastic into the interstices…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Application of Joseph D. FisherCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1970
  2. Application of Walter L. Borkowski and John J. Van VenrooyCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1970
  3. Application of Alfred Marzocchi and Richard C. HortonCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1971
  4. Application of Alexander D. Argoudelis, Clarence De Boer, Thomas E. Eble and Ross R. HerrCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1970
  5. Application of Kenneth A. Metcalfe and William H. LoweCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1969

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. In re ArmbrusterCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1975
  2. Columbia Broadcasting System, Inc. v. Zenith Radio Corp.District Court, N.D. Illinois · 1975
  3. In re GeerdesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1974
  4. In re GoffeCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1976
  5. In re ComstockCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1973

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

Powered by the Exa API