Legal Opinion
In re Marshall
Court of Customs and Patent Appeals
Decided June 30, 1978No. Appeal No. 77-625PublishedCited by 15 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
LANE, Judge.
This is an appeal from the decision of the Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) Board of Appeals (board) sustaining the examiner’s rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 102 of claims 1-4 and entering a new ground of rejection under 37 CFR 1.196(b) of claims 5-9 under 35 U.S.C. § 103. We reverse both rejections.
BACKGROUND
Invention
Normally, when food passes through the terminal region of the stomach, nerve endings there stimulate the release of two hormones, secretin and pancreozymin. These hormones then trigger the production and release of pancreatic enzymes necessary for digestion in the…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- United States v. AdamsSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- In re ArkleyCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1972
- In re SamourCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1978
- Soundscriber Corp. v. United StatesUnited States Court of Claims · 1966
- In re FeltonCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1973
3Cited by15 opinions
- In Re John A. DonohueCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1985
- In Re Richard E. WoodruffCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1990
- Arbrook, Inc. And John J. Nappi v. American Hospital Supply Corporation, Tackmer Corporation, Intervenor-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1981
- Ralston Purina Co. v. Far-Mar-Co, Inc.District Court, D. Kansas · 1984
- In Re Robert K. Grasselli and Harley F. Hardman, and Rohm and Haas Company, IntervenorCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1983
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.