Application of Karl Ziegler, Heinz Breil, Erhard Holzkamp and Heinz Martin
Court of Customs and Patent Appeals
1Opinion of the Court
MARTIN, Judge.
The major issue in this appeal resolves itself into the question of whether a foreign application must show an entire generic invention as presently claimed in a U. S. application in order to be-effective for priority, or whether it may be effective for priority purposes if it shows the same species as the refer enees which otherwise anticipate the claims. A preliminary issue is whether the term “alkali metal alkyl” is anticipated by a lithium aluminum tetraalkyl.
The application on appeal 1 discloses and claims a two-component catalyst useful for the polymerization of olefins,…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Application of Guido H. Stempel, JrCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1957
- Application of George H. Hitchings, Gertrude B. Elion and Irving GoodmanCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1965
- In re RuscettaCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1958
- In Re SteenbockCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1936
- Application of Douglas H. MoretonCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1963
3Cited by7 opinions
- In re WertheimCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1976
- In Re Jacques Gosteli, Ivan Ernest and Robert B. WoodwardCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1989
- Kawai v. MetlesicsCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1973
- Fontijn v. OkamotoCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1975
- In Re Cornelius Mulder and Henricus Elisabeth Jozef WulmsCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1983
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.