Legal Opinion
Gordon Gould v. Donald J. Quigg, Commissioner of Patents and Trademarks
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Decided June 25, 1987No. Appeal 86-1274PublishedCited by 31 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
BISSELL, Circuit Judge.
This is an appeal from the judgment of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia directing the Commissioner of Patents and Trademarks to issue a patent containing claims 1-15 of U.S. Application No. 823,611 (’611) filed August 11, 1977, “insofar as they relate to a gas discharge amplifier:” Gould v. Mossinghoff, 229 U.S.P.Q. 1, 14 (D.D.C.1985) [Available on WESTLAW, DCT database]. We affirm-in-part, vacate-in-part, and remand.
BACKGROUND
The application in suit arrives at this court after a long, arduous journey through the patent continuation,…
2Cases cited23 opinions
- Anderson v. City of Bessemer CitySupreme Court of the United States · 1985
- Morgan v. DanielsSupreme Court of the United States · 1894
- Atlas Powder Company v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Company and Alamo Explosives Company, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1984
- Raytheon Company, Appellee/cross-Appellant v. Roper Corporation, Appellant/cross-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1983
- Gould v. Control Laser Corp.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1983
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by31 opinions
- Dickinson v. ZurkoSupreme Court of the United States · 1999
- Dickinson v. ZurkoSupreme Court of the United States · 1999
- Allen Engineering Corporation v. Bartell Industries, Inc. And Darragh CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2002
- 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
- In Re David C. PaulsenCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1994
26 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.