Legal Opinion
Stanton J. Rowe v. Michael Dror and Paul Trescony
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Decided April 21, 1997No. 96-1304PublishedCited by 122 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
RADER, Circuit Judge.
This is an appeal from a final decision in Interference No. 103,157. The interference involves United States Patent Application No. 07/865,781, filed by Stanton J. Rowe (Rowe) with a priority date of March 14, 1989 and assigned to Cordis Corp. (Rowe application), and United States Patent No. 5,102,402, issued to Michael Dror and Paul Treseony (collectively, Dror) based on an application filed on January 4, 1991 and assigned to Medtronic, Inc. (Dror patent). The Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences (Board) found that Jerome H.…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- United States v. United States Gypsum Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1948
- Bell Communications Research, Inc. v. Vitalink Communications CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1995
- Vaupel Textilmaschinen Kg and Vaupel North America v. Meccanica Euro Italia S.P.A. And American Trim Products, Inc., Defendants/cross-AppellantsCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1991
- In Re David C. PaulsenCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1994
- C.R. Bard, Inc. v. Advanced Cardiovascular Systems, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1990
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by122 opinions
- Pitney Bowes, Inc. v. Hewlett-Packard Company, Defendant-CrossCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1999
- Catalina Marketing International, Inc. v. coolsavings.com, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2002
- Bicon, Inc v. The Straumann CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2006
- Symantec Corp. v. Computer Associates International, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2008
- Poly-America, L.P. v. Gse Lining Technology, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2004
117 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.