Case law

Lang v. United States

8 Ct. Cust. 385 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · May 7, 1918

United States v. Simon & Co. et al. ( 139 Fed., 3 ). … United States v. J. R. Simon & Co. ( 169 Fed., 106 ).

Application of Jerome G. Kuderna, Jr. And Donald D. Phillips

426 F.2d 385 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · May 14, 1970

Here, for example, if one singles out the Lemin patent and the compound therein found to be most structurally similar to that of appellants, the examiner and board's position seems plausible. … As support for this proposition appellants refer to the following statement from Deutsche Gold-Und Silber-Scheideanstalt Vormals Roessler v.

In re Campbell

48 F.2d 915 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Apr 29, 1931

Crouch v. Roemer, 103 U. S. 797 ; Parson Mfg. Co. v. Coe, 185 Fed. 522 ; Turner v. Lanter Piano Co., 248 Fed. 933 . There are three affidavits found in the record pertaining to commercial success of appellants device. … The decision of the Board of Appeals is affirmed.

Boileau v. Godfrey

138 F.2d 67 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Jul 6, 1943

Brogden et al. v. Henry, 21 C. C. P. A. (Patents) 1043, 69 F. (2d) 978, 21 USPQ 279 . … For the reasons heretofore stated the decision of the board will be-affirmed.

St. John v. Schulze

47 F.2d 798 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Mar 25, 1931

Following the decision of the Supreme Court of the *1056 United States in Corona Cord Tire Co. v. Dovan Chemical Co., 276 U. … See also Wietzel v. Lacy, 17 C. C. P. A. (Patents) 943, 39 F (2d) 672, o Pat. Quarterly 86.

In re Mott

539 F.2d 1291 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Aug 12, 1976

This appeal is from the decision of the Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) Board of Appeals (board) affirming the rejection of claims 39, 42, 44, 46, 50, and 57 of appellant’s application serial No. 256,194, filed May 23, … See Hemstreet v. Rohland, 433 F.2d 1403 , 58 CCPA 743 (1970). This broad construction, of course, is to appellant’s benefit. .

Spencer Importing & Trading Co. v. United States

2 Ct. Cust. 444 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Jan 11, 1912

This protest was heard by the Board of General Appraisers upon testimony which included also the record-in the case of Henry Heide v. The United States, now pending in this court upon appeal. … That court at a time subsequent to the enactment of the present law held against the Government and reversed the decision of *450 the board. Heide v. United States (175 Fed. Rep., 316).

Downing Co. v. United States

12 Ct. Cust. 391 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Dec 17, 1924

In contradistinction to this line of authorities, counsel for appellant cites Myers v. United States ( 140 Fed. 648 ) and Williamson v. United States ( 8 Ct. Cust. Appls. 277 ; T. D. 37538). … The judgment of the Board of General Appraisers is accordingly affirmed.

United States v. Stern

5 Ct. Cust. 140 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Feb 5, 1914

In Arthur v. Morgan ( 112 U. … Shaw v. United States ( 122 Fed., 443 ).

Application of Colonial Stores Incorporated

394 F.2d 549 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Apr 25, 1968

McPartland, Inc. v. … The board confined its discussion to that issue.

Balogh v. Crot

176 F.2d 923 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Jun 28, 1949

Such concession was noted by the board in its decision. … Chandler v. Mock, 32 C. C. P. A. (Patents) 1183, 150 F. (2d) 563, 66 USPQ, 209 .

In re Kamrath

67 F.2d 928 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Dec 30, 1933

Cases in which there are found expressions regarded by us as pertinent to the issues here are Luten v. Kansas City Bridge Co., 285 Fed. 840 ; Eclipse Machine Co. et al. v. … Harley-Davidson Motor Co. et al., 252 Fed. 805 ; Sanders v. Hancock, 128 Fed. 424 ; Stillwell-Bierce & Smith-Vaile Co. v. Eufaula Cotton Oil Co. el al., 117 Fed. 410 , with their included citations.

In re Ferenci

68 F.2d 737 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Feb 26, 1934

The-doing of this is now a matter of every day practice in the issuance of patents, and in the case of Steinmetz v. … The decision of the Board of Appeals is affirmed.

Rosenbloom v. United States

13 Ct. Cust. 63 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · May 4, 1925

Batjer & Co. v. United States, 11 Ct. Cust. Appls. 60, 63 . … In Batjer & Co. v.

Sweetland v. Cole

53 F.2d 709 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Dec 7, 1931

(Patents) 1134; Thompson v. Pettis, 44 F.(2d) 420 , 18 C. C. P. A. … The decision of the Board of Appeals is affirmed. Affirmed.

Stirn v. United States

10 Ct. Cust. 17 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Feb 2, 1920

Austin, Baldwin & Co. v. United States ( 7 Ct. Cust. Appls., 186 ; T. D. 36505). … board as to those cases is affirmed.

In re Richardson Ink Co.

511 F.2d 559 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Mar 6, 1975

Delaware & Hudson Canal Co. v. Clark, 80 U.S. (13 Wall.) 311, 324 , 20 L.Ed. 581 (1871). … The decisions of the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board are affirmed. Affirmed.

Application of Beach

152 F.2d 981 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Jan 7, 1946

Mergenthaler v. Scudder, 11 App.D.C. 264 , 1897 C.D. 724; Townsend v. Smith, 36 F.2d 292 , 17 C.C.P.A., Patents, 647. … Ex parte Kerr, 1884 C.D. 27; Pupin v. Hutin et al., 1902 C.D. 269.

In re Mlot-Fijalkowski

676 F.2d 666 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Apr 15, 1982

Republic Industries, Inc. v. Schlage Lock Co., 592 F.2d 963, 975 , 200 U.S.P.Q. 769, 781 (7th Cir. 1979). … Switzer v. Watson, 183 F.Supp. 467 , 125 U.S.P.Q. 48 (D.D.C.1960).

Hobe Button Co. v. United States

12 Ct. Cust. 341 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Nov 4, 1924

The board sustained the protest. … The judgment of the Board of General Appraisers is reversed.