In re Schlaich
This text of 18 F.2d 1014 (In re Schlaich) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Appeal from a decision of the Patent Office refusing certain claims of an application for patent covering capillary tubing, apparatus for making it, and the process. This tubing is used in fluid operated measuring instruments instaEed in automobEes and airplanes, and is said to eliminate, to a marked degree; the inaccuracies and inefficiencies hitherto common to such measuring instruments.
The Examiner, in a carefuEy prepared opinion, rejected the claims involved, because, in his view, the construction therein disclosed differed in degree only from the prior art. The Board of Examiners in Chief, on appeal, again considered the contentions of apphcant and found against him, as did the Commissioner. Giving due consideration to the oral argument and brief on behalf of applicant, we are not convinced that the conclusion of the Patent Office is wrong. This is a highly technical subject-matter, with which the experts of the Patent Office are more familiar .than we, and there is no such clear showing of error as would be required to warrant us in disturbing their finding. The decision therefore is affirmed.
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
18 F.2d 1014, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-schlaich-cadc-1927.