Legal Opinion
Blicharz v. Hays
Court of Customs and Patent Appeals
Decided May 9, 1974No. Patent Appeal No. 9116PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
BALDWIN, Judge.
Blicharz and Jackson (Blicharz) appeal from that portion of the decision of the Board of Patent Interferences which awarded priority of count 1 of interference No. 96,557 to Hays, the senior party.1
The Subject Matter
The count in issue reads (paragraphing added):
1. Granulation method, which comprises uniformly mixing substantially dry particles of a physiologically active material adapted to be ingested and being damaged at elevated temperatures with substantially dry particles of a physiologically inactive and physiologically compatible thermoplastic material which softens at a…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Frederick F. Blicke v. Gino R. TrevesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1957
- James A. Patterson and Glenn K. Lissner v. Karl-Heinz HauckCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1965
- Henry W. Rimbach v. Willem Lambertus Wanmaker and Cornelis BakkerCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1966
- James Harding v. Samuel Steingiser and Ival O. SalyerCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1963
- Knapp v. AndersonCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1973
3Cited by7 opinions
- Michael S. Brown, Joseph L. Goldstein, and Yuval Reiss v. Mariano Barbacid and Veeraswamy ManneCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2002
- Peeler v. MillerCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1976
- Mikus v. WachtelCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1976
- Mikus v. WachtelCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1974
- Wetmore v. QuickCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1976
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.