Legal Opinion
Grasselli v. Dewing
Court of Customs and Patent Appeals
Decided May 6, 1976No. Patent Appeal No. 76-519PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MARKEY, Chief Judge.
This appeal is from the decision of the Board of Patent Interferences awarding priority to senior party-appellees Dewing and Rooney1 (Dewing) over junior party-appellants Grasselli and Miller2 (Grasselli). We reverse.
Background
The count, drafted by the examiner as a so-called phantom count under 37 CFR 1.203(a), is directed generally to a process for preparing acrylonitrile or methacrylonitrile by the catalytic ammoxidation of propane or isobutane, respectively, and reads:
A process for the production of acrylonitrile or methacrylonitrile wherein a hydrocarbon consisting…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Kenneth L. Berry v. Watt W. Webb, William A. Wissler and William D. ForgengCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1969
- Fontijn v. OkamotoCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1975
- James A. Patterson and Glenn K. Lissner v. Karl-Heinz HauckCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1965
- Thurston v. WulffCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1947
- Vogel v. JonesCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1973
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Reese v. HurstCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1981
- Velsicol Chemical Corporation v. Monsanto CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1978
- Mycogen Plant Science, Inc. v. Monsanto Co.District Court, D. Delaware · 1999
- Mead v. McKirnanCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1978
- Sellstedt v. IshimaruCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1976
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.