Legal Opinion
In re Carleton
Court of Customs and Patent Appeals
Decided June 7, 1979No. 78-634PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MILLER, Judge.
This is an appeal from the decision of the Patent and Trademark Office (“PTO”) Board of Appeals (“board”) sustaining the rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 103 of claims 9-13 and 15-16. We reverse.
BACKGROUND
The Invention
Appellant’s application1 discloses a process for the substantially quantitative production of hydroquinone. Claims 9-10 and 152 are directed to the reaction of g-isopro-penylphenol and hydrogen peroxide in an inert solvent such as glacial acetic acid and in the presence of a catalytic amount of a strong mineral acid to produce hydroqui-none and acetone (see reaction…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Graham v. John Deere Co. of Kansas CitySupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- United States v. Mississippi Valley Generating Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1961
- In re RinehartCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1976
- Schering Corporation v. GilbertCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1946
- Application of Richard E. Warner and Virginia Ann WarnerCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1967
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- In Re Francis J.A.M.C. De Blauwe and Frank K.A. SelleslagsCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1984
- In re ReuterCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1981
- In re ReuterCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1981
- In Re Hubert McCarthyCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1985
- In Re Peter S. MillsCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1990
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.