Legal Opinion

Application of Hollingsworth

Court of Customs and Patent Appeals

Decided February 3, 1954No. Patent Appeal 5997PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

WORLEY, Judge.

This is an appeal from the decision of the Board of Appeals of the United States Patent Office affirming the decision of the Primary Examiner in rejecting, as unpatentable over the prior art, all of the claims, Nos. 3, 4, 6, 9, and 14, in appellant’s application for a patent for an alleged invention relating to “Deflu-orination of Phosphate Rock;”

Claim 3 is sufficiently illustrative of the appealed claims. It reads:

“3. ■ In the method of defluorinating a phosphate rock in which the rock is subjected to a two-stage calcination in the presence of water vapor with a first stage…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Hildreth v. MastorasSupreme Court of the United States · 1921
  2. Williams v. HandschieglCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1931
  3. In re LawsonCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1929
  4. In re CreceliusCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1936

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Lewis A. Siegel v. Robert C. Watson, Commissioner of PatentsCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1959
  2. Lewis A. Siegel v. Robert C. Watson, Commissioner of PatentsCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1959

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

Powered by the Exa API