Legal Opinion

In re Zonenstein

Court of Customs and Patent Appeals

Decided February 1, 1949No. 5541PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtHatedeld, 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 rejecting the single claim in appellant’s application for a patent for a design for a lipstick mirror.

The appealed claim reads:

The ornamental design for a lipstick mirror substantially as shown.

The references relied on are:

Hambaugh, 56,359, October 5,1920.

Zaldo, 1,584,205, May 11,1926.

Wolfe, 2,265,094, December 2, 1941.

*846The design here involved relates to a mirror adapted to be mounted on a lipstick and comprises a rectangular mirror mounted in a…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. In Re FaustmannCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1946
  2. In re ThayerCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1947
  3. In re DayCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1941

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Application of JabourCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1950
  2. Application of BigelowCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1952
  3. Columbia Protektosite Co. v. Great American Plastics Co.District Court, D. Massachusetts · 1953
  4. Metallizing Engineering Co., Inc. v. General Screw Mach. Products, Inc.District Court, D. Massachusetts · 1950
  5. PainTEQ, LLC v. Omnia Medical, LLCDistrict Court, M.D. Florida · 2024

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

Powered by the Exa API