Legal Opinion

Arthur William Anderson and William Lawrence Truett v. Gustav Pieper, Hans Rickert and Eberhard Stein

Court of Customs and Patent Appeals

Decided July 15, 1971No. Patent Appeal 8476PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

LANE, Judge.

This appeal is from the decision of the Board of Patent Interferences awarding priority to appellees (hereafter Pieper) on the following count:

1. A process for the production of a solid polyethylene which comprises (1) reducing titanium tetrachloride with aluminum and (2) contacting ethylene with a catalyst consisting of the product of step (1).

Appellants (hereafter Anderson) were in a position junior to Pieper, Anderson’s application serial No. 584,887, filed May 15, 1956, being entitled to the benefit of earlier applications serial Nos. 450,243 and 450,244, both filed August 16,…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Kenneth L. Berry v. Watt W. Webb, William A. Wissler and William D. ForgengCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1969
  2. James A. Patterson and Glenn K. Lissner v. Karl-Heinz HauckCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1965
  3. Teter v. KearbyCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1948
  4. Farrington v. MikeskaCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1946
  5. Allan Robert Andrew Beeber and Daniel S. Spechler v. Lester C. Krogh and Richard E. BrinkCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1969

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Reese v. HurstCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1981
  2. Mikus v. WachtelCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1976
  3. Linkow v. LinkowCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1975
  4. Mattor v. CoolegemCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1976
  5. Spectralytics, Inc. v. Cordis Corp.District Court, D. Minnesota · 2008

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

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

Powered by the Exa API