Legal Opinion

In re Crosby

Court of Customs and Patent Appeals

Decided June 27, 1946No. 5144PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtGarrett, Presiding Judge

This is a.u appeal from a decision of the Board of Appeals of the United States Patent Office affirming that of the Primary Examiner rejecting claims 128 to 131, inclusive, of a patent application for a “Stapling Machine” as unpatentable over the patent to Bloodworth, No. 373,265, dated November 15,1887. Ten claims have been allowed.

The involved claims read as follows:

128. In a stapling machine, means for supporting staples, means at the front end of said supporting means and constituting therewith a staple guideway, means movably guided relative to said supporting means for covering or…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. In re PerrineCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1940

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Application of Lurelle GuildCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1953
  2. Application of Earl E. FolkenrothCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1960
  3. Schneider Metal Mfg. Co. v. Ernst, Inc.District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania · 1952

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

Powered by the Exa API