Application of Friedrich Gruschwitz and Albert Fritz
Court of Customs and Patent Appeals
1DissentRich, Judge
About a year and a half ago this court unanimously found two very general reasons of appeal sufficient to comply with 35 U.S.C. § 142, over Patent Office protest.1 Three claims were under rejection as unpatentable over four references. We said:
“The ‘Reasons of Appeal’ in appellant’s notice of appeal to this court are that the Board of Appeals erred (1) in rejecting claims 22, 23 and 24 on the Sollmann, Benzel, Cowen and Connell patents and (2) in not allowing claims 22, 23 and 24.”
The bar was advised of the procedural “law” represented by this decision in an accurate headnote reading, “Notice…
2Cases cited96 opinions
- Field v. Knowles. Field v. KnowlesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1950
- Dubrock v. Interstate Motor Freight SystemCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1944
- In Re BoyceCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1944
- In re WagenhorstCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1933
- Application of Shao Wen YuanCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1951
91 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.