Introducing ATLASLearn more
Legal Opinion

In Re Crosley

Court of Customs and Patent Appeals

Decided February 11, 1947No. Patent Appeal 5237PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

HATFIELD, Associate Judge.

This is an appeal from the decision of the Board of Appeals of the United States Patent Office affirming the decision of the Primary Examiner rejecting claim 4 in appellants’ application for a patent for an alleged invention relating to sodium tetrathionate in a purified form and containing not more than one molecule of water of crystallization.

Process claims 1, 2, and 3, for preparing stabilized and purified sodium tetrathionate were allowed by the Primary Examiner.

Claim 4 which clearly defines the composition of matter reads: “4. As a new composition of matter,…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. In Re Von BramerCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1942
  2. In Re MardenCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1931
  3. In Re MerzCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1938
  4. In Re MardenCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1931
  5. Farbenfabriken of Elberfeld Co. v. KuehmstedU.S. Circuit Court for the Northern District of Illnois · 1909

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

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Application of Edward Burton LegriceCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1962
  2. Application of KebrichCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1953
  3. Application of FinleyCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1949
  4. Application of ShackellCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1952
  5. In re BaranauckasCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1955

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

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

View API DocsGet API Key

Powered by the Exa API