In re Bourns

‘O’Connell, Judge,

concurring:

I fully agree with the majority of the court that the design here involved is lacking in patentable merit. It is elementary that invention must be present in order to justify the granting of a design patent and that the standard of invention is not lower in the case of design patents than in others. In re Rousso, 42 C. C. P. A. (Patents) 910, 222 F. 2d 729, 106 USPQ 99, and cases there cited.

In our decision in In re Stover, 32.C. C. P. A. (Patents) 823, 146 F. 2d 299, 64 USPQ 186, we pointed out that a patent may properly issue only where the faculty of invention…