Home/Customs and Patent Appeals/Application of Arne v. Larson, Leveret C. Russler and Waldemar J. Meldahl

Application of Arne v. Larson, Leveret C. Russler and Waldemar J. Meldahl

340 F.2d 965, 52 C.C.P.A. 930
CourtCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals
DecidedFebruary 4, 1965
DocketPatent Appeal 7282
StatusPublished
Cited by12 cases

This text of 340 F.2d 965 (Application of Arne v. Larson, Leveret C. Russler and Waldemar J. Meldahl) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Customs and Patent Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Application of Arne v. Larson, Leveret C. Russler and Waldemar J. Meldahl, 340 F.2d 965, 52 C.C.P.A. 930 (ccpa 1965).

Opinion

ALMOND, Judge.

This is an appeal from the decision of the Patent Office Board of Appeals affirming a rejection of claim 12, and the examiner’s refusal to allow claims 15 and 16, which were substituted for finally rejected claims 1 and 6. Eight claims were allowed.

Appellants’ application 1 relates to a mobile fluid carrier unit and a vehicle assembly thereof.

Claims 12 and 15 are illustrative:

“12. In a vehicle, a wheel hub having annular rim flanges, each flange having an annular clamping seat, a flexible-walled casing having beads engaged with the respective seats, clamping means fastened to the respective rim flanges in clamping engagement with said beads to hold said beads to said seats to form a fluid-tight fluid cargo enclosure bounded by said wheel hub and said flexible-walled casing, and frictional brake means, said means including a brake drum integral with a said clamping means, whereby to transmit heat from the brake drum to said wheel hub for transmission to a fluid cargo disposed within said fluid-tight enclosure.
“15. A transport unit having a relatively light frame, said frame consisting only of a longitudinally extending relatively light central frame element and a relatively light tubular transverse axle attached to said central frame element, a pair of relatively light wheel hubs mounted on said axle, and a pair of flexible-walled carrier casings, a said carrier casing being disposed about said axle directly adjacent to each side of said central frame element, said wheel hubs being sealed to said carrier casings to enclose the entire cargo space of said unit.”

Further illustrative of the claimed invention, Figs. 3 and 4 of the drawings are reproduced below.

*966

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

K/S Himpp v. Hear-Wear Technologies, LLC
751 F.3d 1362 (Federal Circuit, 2014)
Safety Rail Source, LLC v. Bilco Co.
656 F. Supp. 2d 468 (D. New Jersey, 2009)
In Re Charles P. Morris, Kenneth L. Pottebaum, and John D. Stricklin
127 F.3d 1048 (Federal Circuit, 1997)
Fairfax Dental (Ireland) Ltd. v. Sterling Optical Corp.
808 F. Supp. 326 (S.D. New York, 1992)
Indecor, Inc. v. Fox-Wells & Co., Inc.
642 F. Supp. 1473 (S.D. New York, 1986)
Mooney v. Brunswick Corp.
489 F. Supp. 544 (E.D. Wisconsin, 1980)
In re Miles
463 F.2d 1401 (Customs and Patent Appeals, 1972)
Application of Roy W. Dike
394 F.2d 584 (Customs and Patent Appeals, 1968)
Application of John A. Gale
396 F.2d 1019 (Customs and Patent Appeals, 1968)
Application of Tomoyuki Kohno
391 F.2d 959 (Customs and Patent Appeals, 1968)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
340 F.2d 965, 52 C.C.P.A. 930, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/application-of-arne-v-larson-leveret-c-russler-and-waldemar-j-meldahl-ccpa-1965.