Legal Opinion
In re Wafmouth
Court of Customs and Patent Appeals
Decided November 8, 1973No. Patent Appeal No. 8991PublishedCited by 11 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MILLER, Judge.
This appeal is from the Patent Office Board of Appeals decision affirming the examiner’s rejection of claims 18-21 of appellants’ application1 under 35 U.S.C. § 132 as containing “new matter.” We reverse and remand.
*1059Claims 18-20 are exact duplicates of claims 1, 2 and 6 of a patent2 to Edris et al., and claim 21 represents a modified claim based on claim 1 of said patent.
The invention relates to a high pressure arc discharge lamp shown in the accompanying figure where 12 is a hermetically sealed are tube having internal terminal electrodes 13 and 14. The arc tube contains a light…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Application of Rudolf WiechertCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1967
- George E. Hall, Jr. v. Louis B. TaylorCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1964
- Application of Earl Phillip Moore. Application of Harold M. Pitt and Harry BenderCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1971
- Marion Den Beste v. Harry MartinCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1958
- Application of Harry Louis Yale, Francis Alexander Sowinski and Jack BernsteinCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1965
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- In re WertheimCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1976
- In Re Sujeet KumarCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2005
- In re KronigCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1976
- Squires v. CorbettCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1977
- In re MottCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1976
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.