Legal Opinion
Matter of the Application of Carl B. Nash
Court of Customs and Patent Appeals
Decided February 21, 1956No. Patent Appeals 6169PublishedCited by 1 opinion
1Opinion of the Court
COLE, Judge.
This is an appeal from the decision of the Board of Appeals of the United ■States Patent Office affirming the rejection by the Primary Examiner of claims 4, 5, 6, 13, 20, and 21 of appellant’s application, Serial No. 774,646, for a patent on an air spring. Claims 20 and 21 were rejected as unpatentable over prior art while claims 4, 5, 6, and 13 were rejected as being drawn to non-elected species, no generic claim having been allowed. Four claims have been allowed. Claim 20, which is representative of the claims rejected on prior art, is as follows:
“20. A variable rate air spring…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Crown Cork & Seal Co. v. Aluminum Stopper Co.Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1901
- Western Telephone Mfg. Co. v. American Electric Telephone Co.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1904
- Application of OlsonCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1954
- Cutler-Hammer Mfg. Co. v. Union Electric Mfg. Co.U.S. Circuit Court for the District of Eastern Wisconsin · 1906
- American Valve & Meter Co. v. FairbanksCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1917
3Cited by1 opinion
- Carl Otto v. Koppers Company, Inc., a Delaware Corporation, and Wheeling Steel Corporation, a Delaware CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1957