Legal Opinion
Hazeltine Research, Inc. v. Brenner
Supreme Court of the United States
Decided December 13, 1965No. 57PublishedCited by 76 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Black
The sole question presented here is whether an application for patent pending in the Patent Office at the time a second application is filed constitutes part of the “prior art” as that term is used in 35 U. S. C. § 103 (1964 ed.), which reads in part:
“A patent may not be obtained ... if the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the art . . . .”
The question arose in this way. On December 23, 1957, petitioner Robert…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Alexander Milburn Co. v. Davis-Bournonville Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1926
- Hazeltine Research, Inc. v. LaddDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 1964
- Hazeltine Research, Inc. v. David L. Ladd, Commissioner of PatentsCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1965
3Cited by76 opinions
- Office Of Communication Of The United Church Of Christ v. Federal Communications CommissionCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1966
- Kloster Speedsteel AB v. Crucible Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1986
- Sun Studs, Inc. v. Ata Equipment Leasing, Inc., Applied Theory, Inc. And U.S. Natural Resources, Inc., Defendants/cross-AppellantsCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1989
- Application of Edwin H. Land and Howard G. RogersCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1966
- Application of Frantz Lund and Wagn Ole GodtfredsenCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1967
71 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.