Case law

Vance W. Tolle and Paul E. Ludy v. William A. Starkey

255 F.2d 935 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Jun 18, 1958

Reed v. Edwards, 101 F.2d 550 , 26 C.C.P.A., Patents, 901; Kohl v. Wilms, 175 F.2d 466 , 36 C.C.P.A., Patents, 1099. … Iron Works v.

Application of Alexander M. Wright

268 F.2d 757 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Jul 10, 1959

Colgate-Palmolive Company v. … Corporation v.

Robie v. Netherly

172 F.2d 557 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Jan 5, 1949

Robie v. Carlton, Patent Appeal No. 5494, decided December 7, 1948, 36 C. C. P. A. (Patents) 739, 171 F. (2d) 310, 80 USPQ 102 ; Finch v. Dillenback, Jr., 28 C. C. P. A. … Q. 468; Sweetland v. Cole, 19 C. C. P. A. (Patents) 751, 53 F. (2d) 709, 11 U. S. Pat. Q. 174, Steenstrup v. Morton, 58 App. D. C. 343, 30 F. (2d) 867.

Western Blind & Screen Co. v. United States

9 Ct. Cust. 68 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Feb 25, 1919

In United States v. … The judgment of the Board of General Appraisers is affirmed.

Balfour v. United States

11 Ct. Cust. 368 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Jun 6, 1922

In the former decision we referred to the case of United States v. … Accordingly, the decision .of the board overruling the protest is affirmed.

Gertzen v. United States

12 Ct. Cust. 499 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Feb 17, 1925

The Board of General Appraisers overruled the protest. … The judgment of the Board of General Appraisers is, therefore, reversed.

Application of Prutton

200 F.2d 706 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Dec 17, 1952

“Attention is directed to Engel-brecht v. … In the case of Schering Corp. v.

Faultless Starch Co. v. Sales Producers Associates, Inc.

530 F.2d 1400 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Mar 11, 1976

Accordingly, the decision of the board is affirmed. AFFIRMED. . Reg. … Hunt was not argued herein before the board. See Curtice-Burns, Inc. v. Northwest Sanitation Products, Inc., 530 F.2d 1396 , 189 USPQ 138 (CCPA 1976).

In re Both

46 F.2d 362 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Jan 21, 1931

We agree with the Board of Appeals that claims 20, 27, 29, 31, 32, and 35 were properly rejected on the references cited. We are unable, however, to agree with the board as to claim 34. … Lektophone Corp. v. The Rola Co., - U. S. -, decided December 8, 1930. Certainly, no one else, so far as the references disclose, has suggested this idea.

Cone v. United States

5 Ct. Cust. 491 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Jan 15, 1915

As stated in the opinion of the board in this case, there is some conflict in the decisions of the board on merchandise that is, if not identical, very similar to that under consideration. … Two of our own decisions are cited—the case of United States v. Continental Color & Chemical Co. ( 2 Ct. Cust. Appls., 165 ; T. D. 31679) and United States v. Danker & Marston ( 2 Ct. Cust. Appls., 522 ; T. D. 32251).

United States v. State Forwarding & Shipping Co.

14 Ct. Cust. 153 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · May 29, 1926

In Tilge v. United States, 3 Ct. Cust. … In Koken Barbers’ Supply Co. v. United States, 7 Ct. Cust.

American Cyanamid Company v. Humble Oil & Refining Co.

370 F.2d 598 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Nov 17, 1966

See, e. g., American Drill Bushing Co. v. Rockwell Mfg. Co., 342 F.2d 1019 , 52 CCPA 1173. In our view the board properly applied this principle to the factual situation here presented. … For the foregoing reasons, we find no reversible error in the decision of the board sustaining the opposition. The decision of the board is affirmed. Affirmed.

In re Smolak

88 F.2d 838 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Apr 5, 1937

In the case of Mineral Separation North American Corporation v. … The decision of the Board of Appeals is affirmed.

In Re Arthur J. Griner

287 F.2d 178 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Feb 21, 1961

We think the board correctly held that claims 3, 5,15, and 16 define nothing more than the application of the Denison process to blocks of biscuits stacked on edge, and the board’s decision as to those claims is affirmed. … The board held that the V-shaped fold is an obvious method of folding commonly employed in closing the ends of grocery bags.

United States v. Field

13 Ct. Cust. 552 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Feb 25, 1926

The merchandise and the issues, as we understand it, are identical with those passed upon by this court in the case of United States v. Kahn & Co., 13 Ct. Cust. Appls. 57 , T. … Under the authority of the above case the judgment of the Board of General Appraisers is reversed.

Application of Fritz L. Mergner

399 F.2d 231 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Jul 3, 1968

Mindful of the admonition of the Supreme Court to avoid an evaluation of the obviousness or nonobviousness of an invention by using hindsight, Graham v. … The board reversed the examiner’s rejection of claims 13-16 and 20. 2 . The board consisted of Messrs. Freedman, Examiner-in-Chief, and Andrews and Burns, Acting Examiners-in-Chief.

Bud Berman Sportswear, Inc. v. United States

469 F.2d 1107 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Dec 7, 1972

Corbett & Co. v. United States, 20 CCPA 178, 180, T.D. 45965; United States v. Malhame & Co., 19 CCPA 164, 170, T.D. 45276; United States v. Victor & Achielis, 16 Ct. Cust. Appls. 122, 124 , T.D. 42767; United States v. … Paredes & Co. v. United States, 63 Cust.

Goldenrod Ice Cream Company v. Louisville Pecan Company

305 F.2d 473 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Jul 18, 1962

We think, however, the board’s view that the goods are sold through the same retail outlets is a reasonable assumption. … Rank Cintel Limited v. Kay Lab, 288 F.2d 938 , 48 CCPA 893. The decision is reversed. Reversed. MARTIN, J., did not sit or participate because of illness.

Zublin v. Pickin

70 F.2d 732 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · May 21, 1934

Clancy v. DeJahn, 17 C.C.P.A. (Patents) 714, 36 F. (2d) 131, and cases therein cited. What is immediately said above applies with equal force to the question of the alleged inoperativeness of the Pickin device. … The decision of the Board of Appeals is affirmed-

Application of Hudson

205 F.2d 174 · Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · Jun 3, 1953

Minerals Separation, Ltd. v. Hyde, 242 U.S. 261 , 37 S.Ct. 82 , 61 L.Ed. 286 . … In the case of General Electric Co. v.