Legal Opinion
In re Scarbrough
Court of Customs and Patent Appeals
Decided June 27, 1974No. Patent Appeal No. 9249PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
LANE, Judge.
This appeal is from the decision of the Board of Appeals affirming the rejection, for insufficiency of disclosure under 35 U.S.C. § 112, first paragraph, of all the claims (claims 1, 2, 4, 5, 7 and 8) remaining in appellant’s application serial No. 768,739, filed October 18, 1968, for “Computer-Controlled Vocal Response.” We affirm.
A preliminary matter, a motion by the Commissioner of Patents to strike TJ.S. Patent No. 3,479,648 to Sleven et al. from the record, is also before us. The patent was added to the transcript of record by motion of appellant (over objection by the…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Application of Alfred Marzocchi and Richard C. HortonCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1971
- In re GlassCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1974
- Application of Hugo Ghiron and Werner UlrichCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1971
- Application of John Nicholson Gardner, Anthony Maitland Roe and George Lawrence WilleyCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1970
- Application of Robert M. ColeCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1964
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- In re HoganCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1977
- Peeler v. MillerCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1976
- In re Simulations Publications, Inc.Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1975
- In re GoffeCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1976
- In re GunnCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1976
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.