Legal Opinion
In Re Harry C. Deckler
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Decided November 25, 1992No. 92-1110PublishedCited by 13 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
FRIEDMAN, Senior Circuit Judge.
The sole issue in this appeal from the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences (Board), is whether the Board correctly ruled that the losing party in an interference proceeding was not entitled to a patent covering claims that that party admits are patentably indistinguishable from the claim involved in the interference. We affirm.
I
The appellant Deckler seeks a patent for an improved seed planter. In an interference proceeding under the “old” rules between Deckler and Grataloup, involving a claim the examiner had suggested to Deck-ler, the Board awarded…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Montana v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
- Federated Department Stores, Inc. v. MoitieSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
- South Corporation and Seal Fleet, Inc. v. The United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1982
- Raymond Keith Foster, Keith Mfg. Co., and Keith Sales, Co. v. Hallco Manufacturing Co., Inc., and Olof A. HallstromCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1991
- Application of Hans Hilmer, Gerhard Korger, Rudi Weyer and Walter AumullerCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1966
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- Larson v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2009
- In Re Stephen P. McGrewCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1997
- National Semiconductor Corp. v. Ramtron Internatonal Corp.District Court, District of Columbia · 2003
- Biogen Ma, Inc. v. Japanese Foundation for Cancer ResearchCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2015
- Maracalin v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2002
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.