Home/Customs and Patent Appeals/In re Pavlecka

In re Pavlecka

319 F.2d 180, 50 C.C.P.A. 1342, 138 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 118, 1963 CCPA LEXIS 308
CourtCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals
DecidedJune 20, 1963
DocketNo. 6971
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 319 F.2d 180 (In re Pavlecka) 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
In re Pavlecka, 319 F.2d 180, 50 C.C.P.A. 1342, 138 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 118, 1963 CCPA LEXIS 308 (ccpa 1963).

Opinion

Worley, Chief Judge,

delivered the opinion of the court:

This appeal is from the decision of the Board of Appeals which affirmed the examiner’s rejection of thirty-one claims in appellant’s application,1 Serial No. 301,010, for a patent for “Interlocked Panel Structure.” Five claims stand withdrawn from consideration under the provisions of Rule 142(b) of the Patent Office.2

[1343]*1343Appellant’s application relates to a construction wherein a plurality of panels are fastened together to form a hollow wall by means of slidable keys engaging “stringers” secured to the inner surfaces of spaced opposing panels. Alternatively, the stringers on opposing panels may each be fastened by a separate key to one of opposite faces of a structural member disposed between the panels. The engaging-faces of the stringers, keys and structural members are provided with matching mortise-and-tenon formations. The ends of the panels are equipped with half stringers which, when the ends of two panels abut, form the equivalent of a full stringer and provide a formation which can be secured by a key to two similar half stringers or to a full or intermediate stringer on opposed panels. Two adjacent half stringers can be secured together independently by a separate key sliding into formations on their adjacent sides or by cooperating dual mortise-and-tenon formations on the engaging longitudinal surfaces of the stringers and the key. Examples of the constructions are illustrated in Figs. 1,3 and 5 of appellant’s application reproduced on the following page:

[1344]*1344

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

Related

Application of Leo L. Hengehold
440 F.2d 1395 (Customs and Patent Appeals, 1971)
Application of Scott Searles, Jr
422 F.2d 431 (Customs and Patent Appeals, 1970)
Application of Robert A. Boyer, Arthur A. Schulz and Edmond A. Schatzman
376 F.2d 977 (Customs and Patent Appeals, 1967)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
319 F.2d 180, 50 C.C.P.A. 1342, 138 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 118, 1963 CCPA LEXIS 308, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-pavlecka-ccpa-1963.