Legal Opinion
Vogel v. Jones
District Court, D. New Jersey
Decided February 8, 1972No. Civ. 1059-70PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
COOLAHAN, Chief Judge:
The genesis of this case is Interference Nos. 96,167 and 96,500. Vogel, a Minnesota resident, and Jones, a British national, are the parties named in the interference proceedings. Vogel assigned his interest to Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Company and Jones assigned his to Imperial Chemical Industries, a corporation of Great Britain. References to Vogel hereafter shall include action taken by 8M and references to Jones shall include I.C.I.’s actions. Both parties seek to be named first inventor of certain moldable plastic compositions called polyarylsulfones.
Priorit…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Natta v. HoganCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1968
- In Re Natta, Movant in the United States Patent Office Before the Examiner of Interferences, Interference No. 89634. Hogan v. Zletz v. Baxter v. Natta E. I. Dupont De Nemours & Co.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1968
- Giulio Natta, (Appellees in No. 16003) v. Alex Zletz and Standard Oil Company of Indiana, (Appellants in No. 16003)Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1967
- Gladrow v. WeiszCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1965
- Montecatini Edison S. P. A. v. E. I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1970
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Brown-Bridge Mills, Inc. v. Eastern Fine Paper, Inc.Court of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1983
- The Brown-Bridge Mills, Inc. v. Eastern Fine Paper, Inc., the Brown-Bridge Mills, Inc. v. Eastern Fine Paper, Inc., Kimberly-Clark Corporation, Brown-Bridge DivisionCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1983