Legal Opinion
Application of William L. Tenney, Paul A. Frank and Scoville E. Knox
Court of Customs and Patent Appeals
Decided April 23, 1958No. Patent Appeal 6327PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
JOHNSON, Chief Judge.
This is an appeal from a decision of the Patent Office Board of Appeals, rejecting claims 3 through 12,14 through 18, 21 and 22, all the claims remaining in appellants’ application No. 111,308, filed August 19, 1949, for “Machine for Producing Dispersions of Liquids in Air or Other Gases for the Production of Fogs,” as unpatentable over the prior art.
The alleged invention, as may be seen from its title, relates to fog producing apparatus, the essential element of said apparatus being a “pulse jet engine.” As will be hereinafter seen, it is not necessary to set forth the…
2Cases cited22 opinions
- Continental Paper Bag Co. v. Eastern Paper Bag Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1908
- Seymour v. OsborneSupreme Court of the United States · 1871
- United States v. Dubilier Condenser CorpSupreme Court of the United States · 1933
- Alexander Milburn Co. v. Davis-Bournonville Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1926
- United States v. American Bell Telephone Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1897
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Philips Electronic and Pharmaceutical Industries Corp. v. Thermal and Electronics Industries, IncCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1971
- Badowski v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1958
- Application of Bo Thuresson Af EkenstamCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1958
- General Tire & Rubber Co. v. Firestone Tire & Rubber Co.District Court, N.D. Ohio · 1972
- Phillips Electronic & Pharmaceutical Industries Corp. v. Thermal & Electronics Industries, Inc.District Court, D. New Jersey · 1970
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.