Legal Opinion

Application of Arthur Sinclair Taylor

Court of Customs and Patent Appeals

Decided May 12, 1966No. Patent Appeal 7601PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

SMITH, Judge.

The sole issue 1 here is whether the rejection of claim 1 of the application on appeal 2 is proper. The rejection is for double patenting and is predicated on the claims of appellant’s prior patent. 3 The application on appeal is a continuation-in-part of the application on which appellant’s prior patent was issued.

The appealed application and the patent are each concerned with a film of collagen which may be slit into ribbons. Collagen is a protein found in, e. g., intestines and tendons of animals. Collagen had been fluidized and cast into ribbons prior to appellant’s invention…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Application of Douglas J. BridgefordCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1966
  2. In re FreemanCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1948
  3. Application of Norman B. ChristensenCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1964

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. Studiengesellschaft Kohle Mbh, as Trustee for the Max-Planck-Institut Fur Kohlenforschung v. Northern Petrochemical CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1986
  2. Takeda Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd. v. DollCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2009
  3. Application of Francis J. BoylanCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1968
  4. General Foods Corporation v. Carnation CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1969
  5. Takeda Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd. v. DudasDistrict Court, District of Columbia · 2007

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API