Legal Opinion
In Re Marshall W. Cronyn
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Decided November 29, 1989No. 89-1434PublishedCited by 54 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
FRIEDMAN, Senior Circuit Judge.
The sole question in this case is whether the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences (Board) correctly held that three undergraduate theses were “printed publications” under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) (1982), which anticipated the invention for which a patent was sought. We hold that the theses were not “printed publications,” and we therefore reverse the Board.
I
A. The facts in this case are undisputed. The patent application was for a chemical compound that apparently may be useful in cancer treatment. The appellant, the applicant for the patent, is a professor of…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Constant v. Advanced Micro-Devices, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1988
- Panduit Corporation v. Dennison Manufacturing Co.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1987
- In Re Leo M. HallCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1986
- In re WyerCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1981
- In re BayerCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1978
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by54 opinions
- Cordis Corp. v. Boston Scientific Corp.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2009
- Kyocera Wireless Corp. v. International Trade CommissionCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2008
- Blue Calypso, LLC. v. Groupon, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2016
- In Re Carol F. Klopfenstein and John L. Brent, JrCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2004
- SRI International, Inc. v. Internet Security Systems, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2008
49 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.