Legal Opinion

Application of Floyd E. Naylor

Court of Customs and Patent Appeals

Decided February 9, 1967No. Patent Appeal 7662PublishedCited by 14 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

WORLEY, Chief Judge.

This appeal is from the decision of the Board of Appeals affirming the rejection of claims 2, 5 and 8-12 in appellant’s application 1 for “Process for Production of Rubbery Polymers” as “unpatentable over Crawford 2 in view of Badische-Anilin 3 under 35 U.S.C. § 103.”

The invention relates to a process for polymerizing 1,3-butadiene to produce a rubbery polybutadiene containing at least 80% of 1,2-addition 4 product. Appel lant uses a catalyst comprising molybdenum pentachloride (M0CI5), an organo-aluminum compound (AIR3) and a minor amount of a promoter such as an…

Also in this document: Concurrence.

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Application of Frederick C. FosterCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1965
  2. Application of Walter Spormann and Joachim HeinkeCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1966
  3. Application of Myron Pantzer and Milton FeierCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1965
  4. Application of Jiri Farkas and Frantisek SormCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1966

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. In re RinehartCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1976
  2. Application of Sune Bergstrom and Jan SjovallCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1970
  3. Ralston Purina Co. v. Far-Mar-Co, Inc.District Court, D. Kansas · 1984
  4. In re MercierCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1975
  5. In re ShettyCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1977

9 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