Legal Opinion
Hall v. Shimadzu
Court of Customs and Patent Appeals
Decided June 20, 1932No. 2982, 2983PublishedCited by 14 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
LENROOT, Associate Judge.
These are appeals in two- interference proceedings from decisions of the Board of Appeals of the United States Patent Office, awarding priority of invention in each interference to appellee. Interference No. 54,798 is involved in the first appeal, being appeal No. 2982, while interference No. 56,224 is involved in the other appeal, being- appeal N o. 2983. For the purposes of the hearing before us, the records in both interferences were consolidated.
Inasmuch as the principal questions involved in each of these appeals are common to both cases, we shall dispose of both…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Morgan Envelope Co. v. Albany Perforated Wrapping Paper Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1894
- Schram Glass Mfg. Co. v. Homer Brooke Glass Co.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1918
- Braren v. HornerCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1931
3Cited by14 opinions
- Electric Storage Battery Co. v. ShimadzuSupreme Court of the United States · 1939
- Kropa v. RobieCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1951
- Ritter v. Rohm & Haas CompanyDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 1967
- Robert A. Reiners v. Charles L. MehltretterCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1956
- Application of BennerCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1949
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.