Legal Opinion
Edwid E. Hays and Wallace & Tiernan, Inc. v. Edward J. Brenner, Commissioner of Patents
Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit
Decided March 2, 1966No. 19711_1PublishedCited by 19 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
J. SKELLY WRIGHT, Circuit Judge:
The primary question presented by this appeal is whether the filing of a terminal disclaimer under 35 U.S.C. § 253 1 may in appropriate cases obviate an objection to patentability based on obviousness under 35 U.S.C. § 103. 2 We hold that it may not. To the extent that Application of Robeson, 331 F.2d 610, 51 CCPA (Patents) 1271 (1964), and Application of Kaye, 332 F.2d 816, 51 CCPA (Patents) 1465 (1964), may hold otherwise, we respectfully disagree with the opinions in those cases.
Appellant Hays’ patent application, 3 entitled “Pharmaceutically Effective Water…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Miller v. Eagle Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1894
- Corcoran v. Montgomery Ward & Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1941
- The Suffolk Company v. HaydenSupreme Court of the United States · 1866
- Esso Standard Oil Company v. Sun Oil CompanyCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1956
- Hazeltine Research, Inc. v. BrennerSupreme Court of the United States · 1965
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by19 opinions
- Application of Albert Bowers and James C. OrrCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1966
- Commissioner of Patents v. Deutsche Gold-Und-Silber-Scheideanstalt Vormals RoesslerCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1968
- Gemveto Jewelry Co., Inc. v. Jeff Cooper Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 1983
- C-Thru Products, Inc. v. Uniflex, Inc.District Court, E.D. New York · 1966
- Application of Arthur C. Borg and Stephen J. ZajacCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1968
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.