Legal Opinion
In re Smythe
Court of Customs and Patent Appeals
Decided June 28, 1973No. Patent Appeal No. 8855PublishedCited by 48 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
RICH, Judge.
This appeal is from the decision of the Patent Office Board of Appeals, adhered to on reconsideration, affirming the rejection of claims 34, 37-40, 42-44, and 47-50 of appellants’ application serial No. 369,695, filed May 25, 1964, entitied “Automatic Analysis Apparatus and Method.” We reverse.
The Invention
The invention relates to a continuous, automatic analysis system wherein discrete liquid samples, perhaps containing blood or other body fluids, are successively introduced into an apparatus as a continuous stream, the individual samples being separated by a segmentizing medium…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Application of Heinrich Ruschig, Walter Aumuller, Gerhard Korger, Hans Wagner, Josef Scholz and Alfred BanderCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1967
- Application of Walter L. Borkowski and John J. Van VenrooyCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1970
- Application of Carl A. Lukach, Setha G. Olson and Harold M. SpurlinCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1971
- Technicon Instruments Corporation v. Coleman Instruments Corporation and American Hospital Supply CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1967
- Technicon Instruments Corp. v. Coleman Instruments, Inc.District Court, N.D. Illinois · 1966
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by48 opinions
- The Regents of the University of California v. Eli Lilly and CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1997
- Brooktree Corporation, Plaintiff/cross-Appellant v. Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1993
- Martek Biosciences Corp. v. Nutrinova, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2009
- In re WertheimCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1976
- In re HoganCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1977
43 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.