Legal Opinion
Houdry Process Corp. v. Universal Oil Products Co.
District Court, D. Delaware
Decided November 30, 1949No. Civ. No. 713PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
RODNEY, District Judge.
This is an R.S. § 49151 proceeding in which plaintiff, an unsuccessful applicant in Interference in the Patent Office, seeks to have the court adjudge priority of invention in its favor and against defendant, the successful applicant in Interference in the Patent Office, and prays that the court direct the Commissioner of Patents to issue to plaintiff a patent on the invention.2
The matter has been unfortunately delayed as a result of a various number of unavoidable circumstances, for many of which this court was not responsible.
The question before the court at this time…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Shields v. BarrowSupreme Court of the United States · 1855
- Special Equipment Co. v. CoeSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
- United States v. Washington Institute of Technology, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1943
- Parker Rust-Proof Co. v. Western Union Telegraph Co.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1939
- Shell Development Co. v. Universal Oil Products Co.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1946
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- In Re: Cybernetic Services, Inc., D/B/A Silent Radio, Inc., Debtor. Petitioning Creditors Byron Z. Moldo, Chapter 7 Trustee of the Estate of Cybernetic Services, Inc., Dba Silent Radio, Inc. ("Moldo") v. Matsco, Inc., in Re: Cybernetic Services, Inc., D/B/A Silent Radio, Inc., Debtor. Byron Z. Moldo, Chapter 7 Trustee v. Matsco, Inc., and Matsco Financial Corporation, Petitioning CreditorsCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2001
- Alamo Refining Co. v. Shell Development Co.District Court, D. Delaware · 1951
- Petitioning Creditors v. Matsco, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2001