In re Bass
United States Court of Customs and Patent Appeals
474 F.2d 1276 (1973)
- Written by Nicole Gray , JD
Facts
Bass Jr., Jenkins Sr., and Horvat (plaintiffs) filed an application as joint inventors of a vacuum system for controlling and collecting waste on machines used to prepare textile fibers for spinning. A patent examiner issued a final rejection of all its claims as obvious in view of five prior-art references including a patent issued to Bass and Horvat as prior joint inventors of the suction nozzle claimed in the application under consideration and a patent issued to Jenkins as the prior inventor of the main cylinder claimed. The inventors filed an affidavit, during the application’s prosecution, stating they jointly invented the invention under consideration as coworkers on a common project and did not invent the subject matter of the Bass and Jenkins patents. The examiner concluded in his final rejection that the affidavit did not remove the Bass and Jenkins patents as prior inventions under § 102(g) because the affidavit antedated the references. The Patent Office Board of Appeals (board) (defendant) affirmed the examiner’s rejection and reasoning.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Rich, C.J.)
Concurrence (Baldwin, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.