In re Christensen
Court of Customs and Patent Appeals
1Opinion of the Court
LANE, Judge.
This is an appeal from the decision of the Patent Office Board of Appeals, adhered to on reconsideration, affirming the rejection of claims 4 and 5 of appellant’s application entitled “Method of Determining Subsurface Porosity.”1 No claims were allowed. Subsequent to the oral argument of this appeal, the Supreme Court of the United States handed down its opinion in Gottschalk v. Benson, 409 U.S. 63, 93 S.Ct. 253, 34 L.Ed.2d 273 (1972) (hereafter Benson). We allowed appellant and appellee here to file supplemental briefs directed to that Supreme Court opinion and both have done so.…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Gottschalk v. BensonSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Application of Walter D. Bernhart and William A. FetterCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1969
- In Re AbramsCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1951
3Cited by26 opinions
- Dann v. JohnstonSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- In re FreemanCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1978
- In re ChatfieldCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1976
- In re AbeleCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1982
- In Re Ralph R. Grams and Dennis C. LezotteCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1989
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.