In Re BURANDT

Why It Matters

Review the linked PDF before publication. The extracted conclusion below is included for audit.

Key Points

• [Page 1] Case: 25-1336 Document: 71 Page: 1 Filed: 10/14/2026 NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential. United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ______________________ IN RE CORLISS O. BURANDT, Appellant ______________________ 2025-1336 ______________________ Appeal from the United States Patent and Trademark Office, Patent Trial and Appeal Board in No. 07/516,757. ______________________ JUDGMENT ______________________ EDWARD A. PENNINGTON, Pennington Oliak PLLC, Washington, DC, argued for appellant Corliss O. Burandt. Also argued by ISAAC DUNN, American University Wash- ington College of Law, Washington, DC. OMAR FAROOQ AMIN, Office of the Solicitor, United States Patent and Trademark Office, Alexandria, VA, ar- gued for appellee John A. Squires. Also represented by NICHOLAS THEODORE MATICH, IV. ______________________ THIS CAUSE having been heard and considered, it is ORD