Legal Opinion · Dissent
Brown v. Gottschalk
Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
Decided August 3, 1973No. 72-1252Published
1DissentRobb, Circuit Judge
The basis of .the majority opinion is that appellants’ compound is “structurally obvious” from the “generic formula” disclosed by the Suter reference. Majority opinion at 814, 816. Since I believe that this is not the proper test for determining the obviousness of a chemical compound under 35 U.S.C. § 103 (1970), and since the District Court prevented appellants from introducing legally relevant evidence in support of their claim, I respectfully dissent.
This court in Comm'n of Patents v. Deutsche Gold-und-Silber-Scheideanstalt Vormals Roessler, 130 U.S.App.D.C. 95, 397 F.2d 656 (1968) held…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Graham v. John Deere Co. of Kansas CitySupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Application of Viktor PapeschCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1963
- Eli Lilly and Company, Inc. v. Generix Drug Sales, Inc., Caribe Chemical Company, Inc., Ellencee Pharmaceutical Laboratories, Inc., (Three Cases)Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1972
- Monsanto Company v. KampDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 1967
- Commissioner of Patents v. Deutsche Gold-Und-Silber-Scheideanstalt Vormals RoesslerCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1968
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.