Purdue Research Foundation v. Robert C. Watson, Commissioner of Patents
This text of 265 F.2d 107 (Purdue Research Foundation v. Robert C. Watson, Commissioner of Patents) 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.
Opinions
In this suit under 35 U.S.C. § 145 to obtain a patent, the District Court upheld the Patent Office in rejecting appellant’s chemical claims on the ground that they failed to define the invention as required by 35 U.S.C. § 112. We find no error. Koebel v. Coe, 70 App.D.C. 261, 105 F.2d 784; Watson v. Bersworth, 102 U.S.App.D.C. 187, 251 F.2d 898. Appellant asks us to notice certain claims which the Patent Office allowed to others, on February 25, 1958, Re. 24,435. However, those claims are more definite than the claims to which the present appeal relates.
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
265 F.2d 107, 105 U.S. App. D.C. 123, 120 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 521, 1959 U.S. App. LEXIS 5513, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/purdue-research-foundation-v-robert-c-watson-commissioner-of-patents-cadc-1959.