Legal Opinion
In re Ornum
Court of Customs and Patent Appeals
Decided August 5, 1982No. Appeal No. 82-505PublishedCited by 35 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
RICH, Judge.
This appeal is from the decision of the United States Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) Board of Appeals (board) sustaining the rejection of claims 1-3, 6, and 7 of application serial No. 821,360, filed August 3, 1977, for “Elastomeric Sealant Composition,” on the ground of double patenting and also on a theory of abandonment by assignment, citing 35 U.S.C. § 102(c). We affirm the double patenting rejection and do not reach the abandonment issue.
Background
The appellant-inventors, Van Ornum and Stang, in addition to filing the application *938at bar, had already had issued to their…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Miller v. Eagle Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1894
- Application of Virgil W. Vogel and Paul W. VogelCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1970
- Application of Max O. RobesonCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1964
- Pope Manufacturing Co. v. Gormully & Jeffery Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1892
- Application of Christian Zickendraht and Arthur BuehlerCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1963
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by35 opinions
- In Re Robert Goodman, Vic C. Knauf, Catherine M. Houch and Luca ComaiCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1993
- Quad Environmental Technologies Corporation v. Union Sanitary District, and A.P.T., Inc., a California Corp. D/B/A Calvert Environmental, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1991
- Eli Lilly And Company v. Barr Laboratories, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2001
- Boehringer Ingelheim International GmbH v. Barr Laboratories, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2010
- Pharmacia Corp. v. Par Pharmaceutical, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2005
30 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.