In re Hernandez

D.C. Circuit

In re Hernandez

298 F. 1019, 54 App. D.C. 404, 1924 U.S. App. LEXIS 2742

Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit·Decided June 2, 1924·No. Patent Appeal No. 1663·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appeal from concurrent decisions of the Patent Office

tribunals refusing to allow this reissue' application with broader claims, it having been filed almost three years after the issuance of the original patent. The Patent Office tribunals have carefully considered the facts and have found that no special circumstances have been shown to excuse the delay. We concur in this finding. See In re Starkey, 21 App. D. C. 519, In re Ams, 29 App. D. C. 91, and In re Otto, 259 Fed. 985, 49 App. D. C. 89. The decision is affirmed. Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

Appeal from concurrent decisions of the Patent Office

tribunals refusing to allow this reissue' application with broader claims, it having been filed almost three years after the issuance of the original patent. The Patent Office tribunals have carefully considered the facts and have found that no special circumstances have been shown to excuse the delay. We concur in this finding. See In re Starkey, 21 App. D. C. 519, In re Ams, 29 App. D. C. 91, and In re Otto, 259 Fed. 985, 49 App. D. C. 89. The decision is affirmed. Affirmed.

In re Hernandez, 298 F. 1019, 54 App. D.C. 404, 1924 U.S. App. LEXIS 2742 (D.C. Cir. 1924).

Pincite

298 F. 1019 (In re Hernandez) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related