Legal Opinion
Corning Glass Works v. Brenner
Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
Decided October 16, 1972No. Nos. 71-1424, 71-1425PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
JAMESON, District Judge:
Appellants, Ellen L. Mochel, an applicant for a patent, and her assignee, Corning Glass Works, brought two actions under 35 U.S.C. Section 145 seeking a judgment directing the Commissioner of Patents to issue a patent for an invention entitled “Method of Glass Treatment and Product.” The cases were consolidated for trial, and a judgment of dismissal was entered in each case,1 the district court sustaining the finding of the Patent Office that the claimed subject matter was obvious in view of prior art, and therefore unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. Section 103.2 The…
2Cases cited29 opinions
- Graham v. John Deere Co. of Kansas CitySupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Cuno Engineering Corp. v. Automatic Devices Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1942
- Hotchkiss v. GreenwoodSupreme Court of the United States · 1851
- Morgan v. DanielsSupreme Court of the United States · 1894
- Abbott v. CoeCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1939
24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Vernon K. Charvat v. Commissioner of PatentsCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1974
- Hirschfeld v. BannerDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 1978
- Pfizer, Inc. v. International Rectifier Corp.District Court, C.D. California · 1980
- Corning Glass Works and Ellen L. Mochel v. Edward J. Brenner, Commissioner of Patents, Corning Glass Works and Ellen L. Mochel v. William E. Schuyler, Jr., Commissioner of PatentsCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1973
- Electro-Nucleonics, Inc. v. MossinghoffDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 1984
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.