MARTIN, Chief Justice.
This is an appeal from concurrent decisions of the Patent Office rejecting claim 8 of appellant's application for a patent.
It appears that this claim constituted count 2 of an interference proceeding involving the same invention, which was before this court in the case of Setzler v. Prichard, 54 App. D. C. 266, 296 F. 1013. The counts of that interference read as follows:
"1. A process for treating petroleum or its derivatives...
Let's get started
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
- Updated daily.
- Uncompromising quality.
- Complete, Accurate, Current.