Legal Opinion
John J. Goodrich v. Arnold C. Harmsen and Burke P. Lokey, Burke P. Lokey v. Arnold C. Harmsen and John J. Goodrich
Court of Customs and Patent Appeals
Decided May 25, 1971No. Patent Appeal 8463, 8464PublishedCited by 22 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
RICH, Judge.
These appeals are from the decision of the Board of Patent Interferences in a three-party interference involving only pending applications in which priority was awarded to Harmsen,1 the junior-most party, as against Lokey,2 the intermediate party, and Goodrich,3 the senior party. We reverse and find that Lokey is entitled to priority on the present record.
THE INVENTION
The subject of the interference is a multi-ply, gusseted, stepped-end, pinch-bottom paper bag. Fig. 20 of Goodrich’s application is reproduced below. In this
figure, the plies as well as the gussets and front and back…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- The Barbed Wire PatentSupreme Court of the United States · 1892
- Hildreth v. MastorasSupreme Court of the United States · 1921
- Larsen v. Marzall, Commissioner of PatentsCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1952
- Tansel v. HigonnetCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1954
- Edgar M. Creamer, Jr. v. Loren R. Kirkwood and Alton J. TorreCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1962
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by22 opinions
- F. Brantley Scott and John H. Burton v. Roy P. FinneyCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1994
- Standard Oil Company v. MontedisonDistrict Court, D. Delaware · 1980
- In re ReuterCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1981
- Friction Division Products, Inc. v. E.I. DuPont De Nemours & Co.District Court, D. Delaware · 1987
- Ralston Purina Co. v. Far-Mar-Co, Inc.District Court, D. Kansas · 1984
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.