Legal Opinion
Hansgirg v. Kemmer
Court of Customs and Patent Appeals
Decided February 27, 1939No. Patent Appeal 4077PublishedCited by 51 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
BLAND, Associate Judge.
This is an appeal by the junior party Hansgirg from a decision of the Board of Appeals of the United States Patent Office, affirming that of the Examiner of Interferences awarding priority of invention in two counts of an interference, which counts define an invention relating to a process of producing substantially pure magnesium.
The interference involves Kemmer’s application, serial No. 542,104, filed June 4, 1931, and Hansgirg’s patent, No. 2,003,487, issued June 4, 1935, on an application filed February 3, 1933.. Both counts were taken from the Hansgirg patent.…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Brand v. ThomasCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1938
- Lindley v. ShepherdCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1928
- Neumair v. MalocsayCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1935
- Parker v. BallantineCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1939
- McKee v. NoonanCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1936
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by51 opinions
- Continental Can Company Usa, Inc. And Continental Pet Technologies, Inc. v. Monsanto Company, Hoover Universal, Inc. And Johnson Controls, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1991
- Par Pharmaceutical, Inc. v. Twi Pharmaceuticals, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2014
- Kropa v. RobieCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1951
- In re OelrichCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1981
- In Re Joyce A. CortrightCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1999
46 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.