Legal Opinion
John H. Bruning v. Ryusho Hirose
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Decided November 25, 1998No. 567PublishedCited by 29 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
RADER, Circuit Judge.
This appeal arises from Interference No. 102,567 between John H. Bruning (Bruning) and Ryusho Hirose (Hirose) before the Board of Patent Appeals & Interferences (the Board). See Bruning v. Hirose, Patent Interference No. 102,567 (Bd. Pat.App. & Int. Sept. 8, 1993) (Final Decision); Bruning v. Hirose, Patent Interference No. 102,567 (Bd. Pat.App. & Int. Feb. 13, 1997) (Reconsideration Decision). Junior party Bruning appeals the Board’s decision that U.S. Patents Nos. 4,773,750 and 4,883,352 (“the Bruning Patents”) are invalid under the best mode requirement of 35 U.S.C. §…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Hybritech Incorporated v. Monoclonal Antibodies, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1986
- Richard C. Price v. Dale R. SymsekCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1993
- Genentech, Inc. v. Novo Nordisk, A/s, Novo Nordisk of North America, Inc. And Novo Nordisk Pharmaceuticals, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1997
- Ppg Industries, Inc. v. Guardian Industries CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1996
- Chemcast Corporation v. Arco Industries CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1990
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by29 opinions
- Amgen Inc., Plaintiff-Cross v. Hoechst Marion Roussel, Inc. (Now Known as Aventis Pharmaceuticals, Inc.) and Transkaryotic Therapies, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2003
- Liquid Dynamics Corp. v. Vaughan Company, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2006
- Process Control Corporation v. V. Hydreclaim Corporation, Defendant-CrossCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1999
- Apotex Usa, Inc. v. Merck & Co., Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2001
- Velander v. GarnerCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2003
24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.