Application of Francis J. Boylan
Court of Customs and Patent Appeals
1Opinion of the Court
ARTHUR M. SMITH, Judge.
The issue presented by this appeal is whether appellant’s claims were properly rejected on the basis of “double patenting.” The rejection is thus predicated on the Patent Office position that the same invention was previously claimed in appellant’s earlier-issued patent. Since a terminal disclaimer was timely filed, the sole issue before us is whether the appellant, in the appealed claims, seeks to claim again the "same invention” previously claimed in his prior-issued patent. 1
This issue arises in an appeal from the decision of the Patent Office Board of Appeals, 2…
Also in this document: Concurrence.
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Application of Max O. RobesonCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1964
- In re SarettUnited States Customs Court · 1964
- Application of Saul KayeCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1964
- Application of David G. BraithwaiteCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1967
- In Re ByckCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1931
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- Application of Virgil W. Vogel and Paul W. VogelCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1970
- General Foods Corporation v. Studiengesellschaft Kohle MbhCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1992
- In Re Leonard Kaplan and Wellington Epler WalkerCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1986
- Eli Lilly And Company v. Barr Laboratories, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2001
- Studiengesellschaft Kohle Mbh, as Trustee for the Max-Planck-Institut Fur Kohlenforschung v. Northern Petrochemical CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1986
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.