Court Opinion

ID: 9450626
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-04 16:53:21.562659+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:32:23.772795
License: Public Domain

WORLEY, Chief Judge, with whom ALMOND, Judge, joins
(dissenting).
It is embarrassing to witness this attempted exercise of authority which Congress has not seen fit to give this court. Quite the contrary, Congress has expressly limited our authority.1
Appellant has had his day in court through the legal procedures controlling the Patent Office.2 The appeal is now ready for decision here on the record made below. It is our duty — indeed we have no choice — but to proceed accordingly.
It is doubtful that the Patent Office wishes to abdicate its heretofore independent status as an arm of the executive branch of the government; but, if so, it would be hard to imagine a better precedent than the instant command offers.

. 35 U.S.C. § 144 states:
“The United States Court of Customs and Patent Appeals, on petition, shall hear and determine such appeal on the evidence produced before the Patent Office, and the decision shall be confined to the points set forth in the reasons of appeal. * * * ” [Emphasis supplied.]

. Tbe Commissioner of Patents, in a decision dated November 19, 1964, denied a petition to reopen this case. Appellant failed to utilize the remedies then available to him to obtain judicial review of that decision.