Introducing ATLASLearn more
Legal Opinion

Application of Elroy M. Gladrow and Paul Thomas Parker

Court of Customs and Patent Appeals

Decided February 27, 1969No. 1376PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

BALDWIN, Judge.

This appeal is from the Patent Office Board of Appeals decision affirming the examiner’s rejection of all the remaining claims in appellants’ application, 1 namely, claims 2-10, 12-14, 19, 21-34, 36-47, 49 and 50, on grounds of double patenting.

THE INVENTION

The invention relates to a method for hydrocracking hydrocarbons by subjecting them to hydrocracking conditions in the presence of a particular catalyst including a platinum group metal combined with a large pore molecular sieve of zeo-lite. Appellants’ specification summarizes the invention as follows:

The present invention…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Application of David G. BraithwaiteCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1967
  2. Application of Charles Curtis SimmonsCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1963
  3. Application of Lawrence A. HeinleCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1965
  4. Application of Robert L. ClarkeCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1966
  5. Application of Howard G. RogersCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1968

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Ciric v. FlanigenCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1975
  2. In re MantellCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1972
  3. In Re Glaxo '845 Patent LitigationDistrict Court, S.D. New York · 2006
  4. In re Da FanoCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1973

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

View API DocsGet API Key

Powered by the Exa API