Legal Opinion

In re Herthel

Court of Customs and Patent Appeals

Decided April 12, 1949No. 5581PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtO’Connell, Judge

This is an appeal from the decision of the Board of Appeals of the United States Patent Office affirming the action of the Primary Examiner in rejecting claims 2, 3, 7, and 8 in appellant’s application for a patent for an alleged invention directed to a process for the animation of olefines by direct reaction between olefine and ammonia. No •claims were allowed.

Claim 2 is representative of the appealed claims. It reads—

*10962. In the amination of olefines wherein an olefine and ammonia are reacted at an elevated temperature and pressure on the order of about 1000-3000 pounds per square inch in the…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. In re DavisCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1939

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. Application of Edwin H. Land and Howard G. RogersCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1966
  2. Application of Winifred June Adams, David Neville Kirk and Vladimir PetrowCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1963
  3. Application of Ahmed Panagrossi and Ray L. HauserCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1960
  4. Application of TankeCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1954
  5. Application of Henry P. Wohnsiedler and Clayton J. AmmondsonCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1963

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API