Legal Opinion

In re Oelrich

Court of Customs and Patent Appeals

Decided December 10, 1981No. Appeal No. 81-564PublishedCited by 90 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

RICH, Judge.

This appeal is from the decision of the United States Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) Board of Appeals (board) sustaining the examiner’s rejection of claim 1 in application serial No. 452,050, filed March 18, 1974, entitled “Sub-Critical Time Modulated Control Mechanism,” under 35 U.S.C. § 102 as anticipated by appellant Oelrich’s U.S. patent No. 3,430,536 for “Time Modulated Pneumatically Actuated Control Mechanism,” issued March 4, 1969. We reverse.

Background

This application was the subject of In re Oelrich, 579 F.2d 86, 198 USPQ 210 (CCPA 1978), in which a rejection of claims…

2Cases cited9 opinions

Hansgirg v. KemmerCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1939
Application of Carl F. Swinehart and Marko SfiligojCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1971
In re WisemanCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1979
Application of Dwin R. Craig and John N. StreetCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1969
In re LudtkeCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1971

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by90 opinions

Continental Can Company Usa, Inc. And Continental Pet Technologies, Inc. v. Monsanto Company, Hoover Universal, Inc. And Johnson Controls, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1991
Electro Medical Systems, S.A. v. Cooper Life Sciences, Inc., Dentsply International Inc., and Dentsply Research & Development Corp.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1994
Crown Operations International, Ltd. And Marshall H. Krone v. Solutia Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2002
Robert L. Jones and Labrado, Inc. v. Alex HardyCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1984
Verdegaal Brothers, Inc., William Verdegaal, George Verdegaal v. Union Oil Company of California, Brea Agricultural Services, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1987

85 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.