Case law

Snow's United States Sample Express Co. v. United States

8 Ct. Cust. 17 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Apr 19, 1917

United States v. Buss & Co. ( 5 Ct. Cust. Appls., 110 ; T. D. 34138). … The decision of the Board of General Appraisers is reversed.

Application of Ulrich Finsterwalder

436 F.2d 1028 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Feb 4, 1971

The board further found no patentable significance in any of the other features recited in the claims. … The decision of the board is affirmed. Affirmed. 1 . U. S. Patent 3,003,219, October 10, 1961.

Application of Shenango Ceramics, Inc

362 F.2d 287 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Jun 23, 1966

Co. v. June Mfg. Co., 163 U.S. 169, 185 , 16 S.Ct. 1002 , 41 L.Ed. 118 (1896). … So far as is pertinent to registrability for federal trademark protection, we believe Sears, Roebuck & Co. v. Stiffel Co., 376 U.S. 225 , 84 S.Ct. 784 , 11 L.Ed.2d 661 and Compco Corp. v.

United States v. De Boer

6 Ct. Cust. 30 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Mar 25, 1915

Latimer v. United States ( 223 U. S., 501, 504 ). … The court in that case distinguished the case of United States v.

Newhall v. United States

4 Ct. Cust. 134 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · May 6, 1913

In United States v. Danker ( 2 Ct. Cust. Appls., 522 ; T. … In United States v. Sheldon ( 2 Ct. Cust. Appls., 485 ; T.

George v. Karsel

111 F.2d 148 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Apr 1, 1940

Both motions were denied by the Examiner of Interferences and such decision was affirmed by the Board of Appeals. … See Derby et. al. v. Whit worth, 20 C. C. P. A. (Patents) 791, 62 F. (2d) 368.

National Biscuit Co. v. United States

20 C.C.P.A. 395 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Feb 6, 1933

Directions to so enter the goods had been given to Christie, Brown & Co. by Albert W. Kasten, the controller of appellant. … Wolf & Co. v. United States, 13 Ct. Cust. Appls. 589 , T. D. 41453; Taggesell Co. v. United States, 17 C. C. P. A. (Customs) 15, T. D. 43318; Kennedy v. United States, 19 C. C. P. A. (Customs) 24, T.

Kenneth H. White v. Harold H. P. Lemmerman

341 F.2d 110 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Feb 11, 1965

The board, in holding that the tests conducted by White prior to the filing of Lemmerman’s patent application were insufficient to establish reduction to practice, relied upon Larsen v. … Marzall, 90 U.S.App.D.C. 260 , 195 F.2d 200 (1952) and Elmore v. Schmitt, 278 F.2d 510 , 47 CCPA 958.

Bourdon v. Kraft

113 F.2d 115 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Jul 8, 1940

BOURDON v. KRAFT 3. … For the reasons hereinbefore stated, the decision of the Board of Appeals is reversed.

In re Rockwell

150 F.2d 560 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Jun 22, 1945

Hall v. Shimadzeu, 19 C. C. P. A,. (Patents) 1288, 59 F. (2d) 225, 13 USPQ 259 ; Braren v. Horner, 18 C. C. P. A. (Patents) 971, 47 F. (2d) 358, 8 USPQ 455 ; In re Dawe, 19 C. C. P. A. … The decision of the Board of Appeals is affirmed.

Katzenstein & Keene v. United States

14 Ct. Cust. 143 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · May 22, 1926

'The Board of General Appraisers therefore overruled the protest and the importer appealed. On the hearing before the board, Harry A. … See United States v. Wakem & McLaughlin (Inc.), 13 Ct. Cust. Appls. 37 , T. D. 40867.

United States v. Nightingale

5 Ct. Cust. 79 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Jan 14, 1914

In United States v. … The court, in an extended opinion, quotes at some length from the case of United States v.

In re Luks

69 F.2d 552 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Apr 2, 1934

In the leading case of Potts v. … In the case of Hobbs v.

In re Truslow

104 F.2d 203 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Jun 5, 1939

(Patents) 861, 87 F. (2d) 499; Patramountt Publix Corporation v. American Tri-Ergon Corporation, 294 U. S. 464 . … We are of opinion that the appealed claims were properly held unpatentable over the cited reference and accordingly the decision of the Board of Appeals is affirmed.

United States v. Shing Shun & Co.

2 Ct. Cust. 388 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Dec 19, 1911

Robertson v. Salomon ( 130 U. S., 412 ); Nix v. Hedden ( 149 U. S., 304 ). *389 We are impressed witb the reasoning of the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in the case of United States v. … The decision of the Board of General Appraisers is reversed.

Kuttroff, Pickhardt & Co. v. United States

13 Ct. Cust. 203 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Jul 3, 1925

Hatfield, Judge, delivered the opinion of the court: This is an appeal from the judgment of the Board of General Appraisers in reappraisement 13174-A. … Kahlen v. United States, 2 Ct. Cust. Appls. 206 T. D. 31947.

Edgar M. Creamer, Jr. v. Loren R. Kirkwood and Alton J. Torre

305 F.2d 486 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Oct 24, 1962

Archer v. Papa, 46 CCPA 835, 265 F.2d 954 . We think they have met that burden in proving reduction to practice by the middle of August of 1950, as found by the board. … Bennett v. James E.

United States v. Conkey

12 Ct. Cust. 552 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Mar 23, 1925

—Hansen v . United States ( 1 Ct. Cust. Appls. 1 ; T. D. 30769); Kwong Yuen Shing v. United States ( 1 Ct. Cust. Appls. 16 ; T. D. 30774); Causse Mfg. Co. v. United States ( 151 Fed. 4 ); Moscahlades Bros. v. … The judgment of the Board of General Appraisers is reversed.

In re Asseff

173 F.2d 253 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Mar 1, 1949

In both these cases the courts followed the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Miller v. Eagle Manufacturing Co., 151 U. … For the reasons indicated the decision of the Board of Appeals is affirmed.

Erich F. Meitzner and James A. Oline v. Herbert Corte and Alfred Meyer

410 F.2d 433 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · May 15, 1969

Attention is directed to Raiche v. … It convinces us, as it convinced the board, that appellants, jointly or individually, had not conceived of all the means necessary to effect the result desired. And, on this point, we agree with the board that Alpert v.