Legal Opinion
John H. Biel v. Max Chessin
Court of Customs and Patent Appeals
Decided July 8, 1965No. Patent Appeal 7370PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
RICH, Judge.
This appeal is from the decision of the Board of Patent Interferences awarding priority, in Interference No. 90,730, to the senior party Chessin. The interference is between two continuation-in-part applications, Biel application serial No. 716,876, filed February 24, 1958, based upon copending Biel application serial No. 605,724, filed August 23, 1956, and Chessin application serial No. 766,407, filed October 10, 1958, based upon co-pending Chessin application 680,919, filed August 29,1957.
According to appellant’s brief, the Biel applications are now owned by Colgate-Palmolive…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Application of Viktor PapeschCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1963
- Application of HenzeCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1950
- In Re HassCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1944
- Application of Arthur D. Lohr and Harold M. SpurlinCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1963
- Application of Josef FriedCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1963
3Cited by8 opinions
- Burroughs Wellcome Co. v. Barr Laboratories, Inc., and Novopharm, Inc. And Novopharm, Ltd.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1994
- Amax Fly Ash Corp. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1975
- Rohm and Haas Co. v. Dawson Chemical Co., Inc.District Court, S.D. Texas · 1983
- Thomas Lynn Fields v. Lloyd H. Conover and Robert B. WoodwardCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1971
- Application of Francis J. Honn and Willard M. SimsCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1966
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.