Legal Opinion
Stamicarbon, N.V. v. Chemical Construction Corp.
District Court, D. Delaware
Decided July 30, 1975No. Civ. A. No. 4442PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
LATCHUM, Chief Judge.
In this action, the Court is called upon to review a decision of the United States Patent Office Board of Patent Interferences which, in an interference proceeding, awarded priority of two patent counts to the plaintiff, Mathieu Bongard (“Bongard”) over Ivo Mavrovic, the assignor of the defendant, Chemical Construction Corporation (“Chemico”). Jurisdiction is based on 35 U.S.C. § 146 and 28 U.S.C. § 1338.1
The pertinent facts are as follows: The plaintiff, Stamicarbon, N.V. (“Stamicarbon”) is the assignee of a U. S. patent application on a process for synthesizing…
2Cases cited27 opinions
- Morgan v. DanielsSupreme Court of the United States · 1894
- Hansgirg v. KemmerCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1939
- Radio Corporation of America and United States of America v. International Standard Electric CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1956
- Chromalloy American Corp. v. Alloy Surfaces Co., Inc.District Court, D. Delaware · 1972
- William S. Gubelmann, Deceased, by Walter S. Gubelmann v. Herman GangCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1969
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Stamicarbon, N.V. v. Chemical Construction Corp.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1976
- Stamicarbon, N.V. v. Chemical Construction Corp.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1976
- Stamicarbon, N.V. v. The Chemical Construction CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1976