Legal Opinion
In Re Robert J. Gartside and Richard C. Norton
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Decided February 15, 2000No. 99-1241PublishedCited by 495 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
LOURIE, Circuit Judge.
Robert J. Gartside and Richard C. Norton (collectively “Gartside”) appeal from the final decision of the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences holding that claims 34, 35, and 37-47 of application Ser. No. 07/798,627 are unpatentable as obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103. See Forgac v. Gartside, Paper No. 72 (BPAI May 21, 1998). Because the Board’s factual findings relating to its obviousness analysis are supported by substantial evidence, and because the Board did not err in concluding that the claims were unpatentable as obvious as a matter of law, we affirm.
BACKGROUND
A.…
2Cases cited24 opinions
- Consolidated Edison Co. v. National Labor Relations BoardSupreme Court of the United States · 1938
- Universal Camera Corp. v. National Labor Relations BoardSupreme Court of the United States · 1951
- Citizens to Preserve Overton Park, Inc. v. VolpeSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
- Abbott Laboratories v. GardnerSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Graham v. John Deere Co. of Kansas CitySupreme Court of the United States · 1966
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by495 opinions
- Cross Medical Products, Inc. v. Medtronic Sofamor Danek, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2005
- Merck & Co. v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2005
- Tom Cunningham v. Laser Golf Corporation (Now Known as Belair Golf)Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2000
- Cae, Incorporated v. Clean Air Engineering, IncorporatedCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2001
- In Re Majestic Distilling Company, IncCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2003
490 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.