Legal Opinion

In re Reichel

Court of Customs and Patent Appeals

Decided June 17, 1936No. 3634PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the CourtLeneoot, Judge

This is an appeal from a decision of the Board of Appeals of the United States Patent Office, affirming the decision of the examiner rejecting all of the claims of appellant’s application, four in number, for want of patentability in view of the prior art.

Claim 1 is illustrative of the claims on appeal and reads as follows:

1. An expansible diaphragm device comprising means providing a chamber and including a supporting shell, a diaphragm closing said chamber and movable in response to a difference in pressure at opposite sides of the diaphragm, said diaphragm having a peripheral flange…

2Cited by1 opinion

  1. In re KylstraCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1937

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

Powered by the Exa API