Legal Opinion
Pingree v. Hull
Court of Customs and Patent Appeals
Decided June 26, 1975No. Patent Appeal No. 74-623PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MILLER, Judge.
The senior party, Pingree and Batman (Pingree),1 appeals from the decision of the Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) Board of Patent Interferences awarding priority of the invention described in four counts to the junior party Hull.2 We affirm.
The invention deals with adhesive removal of guard hairs from fur seal skins, leaving the fine fur fibers intact. The fine fur, which is covered and protected by the longer and coarser guard hairs, is the part of the skin prized by furriers and their customers. Count 1 describes the invention:
A process for removing guard hair from a fur…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Application of Rudolf WiechertCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1967
- Hansgirg v. KemmerCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1939
- Young v. DworkinCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1974
- Ivar Jepson v. Robert E. Coleman, Jr., and Calvin D. MacCrackenCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1963
- Lester C. Crome v. Henton MorroghCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1956
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Peeler v. MillerCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1976
- Horwath v. LeeCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1977
- Kooi v. DeWittCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1976
- In re WildingCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1976
- Peeler v. MillerCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1976
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.