Thank You For Submiting Feedback!
United States Court of Customs and Patent Appeals
Oral argument December 8, 1967 ; June 27, 1968 1
[****211] [**350] [*1376] Before WORLEY, Chief Judge, and Judges RICH, SMITH, ALMOND, KIRKPATRICK. 2
RICH, Judge, delivered the opinion of the court:
This appeal is from a decision of the Patent Office Board of Appeals affirming the examiner's rejection of claims 17-23 of application serial No. 205,164, filed June 14, 1962, for "Lathing Clips" on the ground of double patenting. No claim has been allowed.
The claimed subject matter relates to clip systems for securing gysum lath to support members in partition walls and ceiling constructions. The clip is an elongated curved piece of bent wire having head portion 62 as illustrated in Figs. 4 and 5 of appellant's application, reproduced below.
[Graphic omitted. See illustration in original.]
[**351] Fig. 4 shows head portion 62 alone from an axial, end view. Fig. 5 shows the entire clip. Head [***2] portion 62 comprises a lip portion 63, a loop portion 67 formed by a first side leg 64, a bottom leg 65 and a second side leg 66, and an offsetting leg 68, terminating in [****212] a sinuous prong 69. The legs 64-66 of the loop portion 67 are disposed in a "first plane," the body portion 60 and lip 63 being on opposite sides of that plane. A plurality of the clips are interlocked with each [*1377] other over lath boards and attached to studs as illustrated in Fig. 1 below: [****213]
Claims 17-22 are drawn to the wire clip as described above. Claim 23 is drawn to the combination of lath sheets attached to frame members by the wire clips. All claims recite the lip portion of the clip and all except 18 and 19 omit [**352] reference to prong 69, which serves the dual function of holding the lath and the tail of another clip.
In rejecting claims 17-23, the board based its finding of double patenting on claims 2 and 3 of appellant's patent 2,945,329 issued July 19, 1960. The present application is a continuation of application serial No. 805,005 which is a division of the application for said patent. Figs. 1, 4, and 5 of the patent drawings [***3] are substantially the [*1378] same as and show the same structure as Figs. 1, 4, and 5 reproduced above. A modification of the above-described clip in which the lip (63) has a modified shape and the body (60) extends at a greater angle to the plane of the loop (67), shown in Figs. 2 and 3 of the present application, is likewise shown in Figs. 2 and 3 of the patent. The patent also discloses further clips which have no body portions for use as "starter" clips in the floor and ceiling positions, as shown in Fig. 1, supra, at 33 and 34. Essentially, these starter clips provide prongs (69) positioned on offsetting legs so that the prongs overlie the surface of the lath to hold it and also hold the tail ends (61) of associated clips crossing adjacent laths just as do the prongs 69 in Figs. 4 and 5.
Full case includes Shepard's, Headnotes, Legal Analytics from Lex Machina, and more.
55 C.C.P.A. 1375 *; 397 F.2d 350 **; 1968 CCPA LEXIS 298 ***; 158 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 210 ****
IN RE JOSEPH W. SCHNELLER
Prior History: [***1] APPEAL from Patent Office, Serial No. 205,164
patent, clip, leg, invention, lath, prong, lip, plane, offsetting, loop, terminating, extending, double patenting, wire, sheet, elongate, comprising, adjacent, tail, opposite end, perpendicularly, perpendicular, disclaimer, attaching, straight, framing, starter, bottom
Patent Law, Jurisdiction & Review, Subject Matter Jurisdiction, Appeals, Double Patenting, General Overview, Standards & Tests, US Patent & Trademark Office Proceedings, Continuation Applications, Divisionals & Restrictions