Legal Opinion
Application of Carl F. Swinehart and Marko Sfiligoj
Court of Customs and Patent Appeals
Decided April 1, 1971No. Patent Appeal 8396PublishedCited by 45 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
BALDWIN, Judge.
This appeal is from the decision of the Patent Office Board of Appeals, adhered to on reconsideration, which affirmed the rejection of claim 24 in appellants’ application 1 as failing to meet the requirements of 35 U.S.C. § 112. The board reversed the rejection of two other claims.
THE INVENTION
The subject matter of the appealed claim is a composition of matter essentially made up of barium fluoride and calcium fluoride in approximately eutectic proportions. The record indicates, and appellants confirm, that “[ejutectic compositions of barium fluoride and calcium fluoride are…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- General Electric Co. v. Wabash Appliance Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1938
- Application of Joseph D. FisherCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1970
- Application of Walter L. Borkowski and John J. Van VenrooyCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1970
- Application of Charles T. FuettererCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1963
- Locklin v. Switzer Bros.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1961
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by45 opinions
- Halliburton Energy Services, Inc. v. M-I LLCCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2008
- Basf Corporation v. Johnson Matthey Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2017
- Verdegaal Brothers, Inc., William Verdegaal, George Verdegaal v. Union Oil Company of California, Brea Agricultural Services, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1987
- In Re SchreiberCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1997
- Microprocessor Enhancement Corp. v. Texas Instruments Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2008
40 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.