Legal Opinion
In re Walter
Court of Customs and Patent Appeals
Decided March 27, 1980No. Appeal No. 79-599PublishedCited by 24 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
RICH, Judge.
This appeal is from the decision of the Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) Board of Appeals (board), affirming the examiner’s final rejection of claims 7-14 and 16-18 in application serial No. 303,693, filéd November 6, 1972, entitled “Seismic Prospecting System.” The sole ground of rejection of the claims is that they are directed to nonstatutory subject matter under 35 U.S.C. § 101. We affirm.
The Invention
Appellant’s invention is used in seismic prospecting and surveying. In this field, seismic source waves are generated and transmitted downwardly into the earth. There they are…
2Cases cited23 opinions
- Eibel Process Co. v. Minnesota & Ontario Paper Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1923
- Gottschalk v. BensonSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Parker v. FlookSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
- O'Reilly v. MorseSupreme Court of the United States · 1854
- Tilghman v. ProctorSupreme Court of the United States · 1881
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by24 opinions
- In Re BilskiCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2008
- In Re Kuriappan P. Alappat, Edward E. Averill and James G. LarsenCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1994
- State Street Bank & Trust Co. v. Signature Financial Group, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1998
- AT&T Corp. v. Excel Communications, Inc., Excel Communications Marketing, Inc., and Excel Telecommunications, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1999
- In re AbeleCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1982
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.