Legal Opinion
Application of Karl E. Prindle and Ross C. Reed
Court of Customs and Patent Appeals
Decided January 12, 1962No. Patent Appeals 6714PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
WORLEY, Chief Judge.
This is an appeal from the decision of the Board of Appeals of the United States Patent Office affirming the rejection of claims 1 to 10, and 17 to 19, inclusive, of appellants’ application, Serial No. 774,-970, for a patent on “Tinsel.”
Claims 1 and 9 are typical of the appealed claims and read:
“1. A tinsel staple comprising a narrow ribbon having a metal deposit coating its surface, said ribbon consisting esentially of a self-extinguishing organic plastic polymer.
“9. Christmas tinsel comprising a package of multitudinous staples of rectangular cross-section arranged in…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- General Electric Co. v. Jewel Incandescent Lamp Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1945
- Gillman v. SternCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1940
- In re LillichCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1957
3Cited by3 opinions
- In Re Baxter Travenol LabsCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1991
- La Maur, Inc. v. DeMert & Dougherty, Inc.District Court, N.D. Illinois · 1965
- Application of Karl E. Prindle and Ross C. ReedCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1962