Legal Opinion
In Re the Successor in Interest to Walter Andersen
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Decided September 17, 1984No. Appeal 83-1024PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Per curiam
This appeal arises from a decision of the United States Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) Board of Appeals (Board). Acting in the context of a reexamination proceeding conducted under 35 U.S.C. §§ 301-307 (1982), an examiner from the PTO rejected all claims of a patent owned by the appellant (Andersen patent) 1 . The basis for this ruling was that the claimed invention would have been obvious in view of a previous patent, known as the Winder patent.I. 2 See generally 35 U.S.C. § 103. The Board affirmed the examiner’s ruling, and this appeal ensued. We affirm.
I
The Andersen patent concerns an…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- American Hoist & Derrick Company, Cross-Appellee v. Sowa & Sons, Inc., Cross-AppellantCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1984
- Stratoflex, Inc. v. Aeroquip CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1983
- Ssih Equipment S.A. v. United States International Trade Commission and Stewart-Warner CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1983
- Hughes Aircraft Company v. The United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1983
- Medtronic, Inc., and Med-Rel, Inc. v. Cardiac Pacemakers, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1983
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- In Re Berwyn E. EtterCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1985
- John H. Coleman v. Martin B. DinesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1985
- In Re Hubert McCarthyCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1985
- In Re Berwyn E. EtterCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1985
- In Re Berwyn E. EtterCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1985
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.