Legal Opinion
Application of Hartmut Steppan, August Rebenstock and Wilhelm Neugebauer
Court of Customs and Patent Appeals
Decided December 28, 1967No. Patent Appeal 7831PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
SMITH, Judge.
The principal issues for decision are: (1) whether the compounds defined in appealed claims 17 through 22 would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art within the meaning of 35 U. S.C. § 103; and (2) whether claim 25 is an improper “product-by-process” claim. The Patent Office Board of Appeals 1 affirmed the examiner’s rejection of the claims in issue presented in appellants’ application. 2
The Invention
Appellants’ claimed invention is directed to condensation products of substituted or unsubstituted diphenylamine-4-diazonium salts with formaldehyde. The condensation…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Graham v. John Deere Co. of Kansas CitySupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Application of Douglas J. BridgefordCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1966
- Application of ArbeitCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1953
- Application of ShortellCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1949
- Application of LiftonCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1951
3Cited by9 opinions
- Smithkline Beecham Corp. v. Apotex [Corrected Date]Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2006
- Atlantic Thermoplastics Co., Inc., James B. Sullivan and Richard B. Fox v. Faytex Corporation, Defendant/cross-AppellantCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1992
- In re BrownCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1972
- Application of Anthony L. GarneroCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1969
- Application of Lionel Alexander Bethune PilkingtonCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1969
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.