Legal Opinion

Application of Herbert C. Murray and Durey H. Peterson

Court of Customs and Patent Appeals

Decided June 30, 1959No. Patent Appeal 6422PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

RICH, Judge.

This appeal is from the decision of the Patent Office Board of Appeals affirming the examiner’s rejection of claims 1-6 of appellants’ application Serial No. 355,-152, filed May 14, 1953 for Steroid Compounds.

All of the claims are directed to new chemical compounds, claim 2 reading:

“11 «-Hydroxy-16,17-oxidoprogester-one.”

Claims 3-6 are directed to the esters of this compound and claim 1 is a generic claim displaying the structural formula basic to all of the claimed compounds, wherein the radical “RO-” is shown as an 11 -alpha substituent, the claim stating that “R is selected…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Application of Guido H. Stempel, JrCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1957
  2. In Re Von BramerCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1942
  3. In re RuffCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1958
  4. In Re StollCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1947

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. In re SponnobleCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1969
  2. Application of Claus L. SporckCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1962
  3. In re NomiyaCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1975
  4. Application of Philip v. Palmquist and James v. ErwinCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1963
  5. Application of Helen M. Krazinski, Robert G. Shepherd and William E. TaftCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1965

8 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