Legal Opinion
In Re Beineke
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Decided August 6, 2012No. 2011-1459, 2011-1460PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
DYK, Circuit Judge.
Walter F. Beineke (“Beineke”) appeals from the decisions of the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences (“Board”) affirming the examiner’s rejection of two plant patent applications under 35 U.S.C. § 161. Ex parte Beineke (“2011-1459 Final Decision ”), No. 2010-011045 (B.P.A.I. Mar. 16, 2011); Ex parte Beineke (“2011-1460 Final Decision”), No. 2010-011047 (B.P.A.I. Mar. 16, 2011). We affirm.
Background
The plant patent amendments of 1954 revised what is now 35 U.S.C. § 161 to provide, as it does today, that
[wjhoever invents or discovers and asexually reproduces any distinct…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Immigration & Naturalization Service v. Cardoza-FonsecaSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
- Cannon v. University of ChicagoSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
- Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc. v. CurranSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
- Gulf Oil Corp. v. Copp Paving Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1974
- Diamond v. ChakrabartySupreme Court of the United States · 1980
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Sikorsky Aircraft Corporation v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2014
- Inre: Roslin Institute (Edinburgh)Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2014
- Uniloc U.S. Inc. v. LG Elecs. USA Inc.District Court, N.D. California · 2019