Legal Opinion
Silvestri v. Grant
Court of Customs and Patent Appeals
Decided May 9, 1974No. Patent Appeal No. 8978PublishedCited by 25 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
RICH, Judge.
This appeal is from the decision of the Patent Office Board of Patent Interferences awarding priority to appellee, the senior party, Grant et al. (hereinafter Grant). We reverse.
The sole count corresponds to claim 1 of Grant’s patent,1 on which he is involved in this interference. Appellants, Silvestri et al. (hereinafter Silvestri), provoked this interference by filing an application2 after the issuance of the Grant patent, alleged to be a continuation-in-part of an earlier application.3
Silvestri took testimony and introduced documentary evidence to prove conception of the…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Eibel Process Co. v. Minnesota & Ontario Paper Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1923
- Application of Heinrich Ruschig, Walter Aumüller, Gerhard Korger, Hans Wagner, Josef Scholz and Alfred BänderCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1965
- Myers v. FeigelmanCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1972
- Heard v. BurtonUnited States Customs Court · 1964
- Langer v. KaufmanCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1972
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by25 opinions
- Richard C. Price v. Dale R. SymsekCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1993
- Invitrogen Corp. (Formerly Known as Life Technologies, Inc.) v. Clontech Laboratories, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2005
- Peter B. Cooper v. David GoldfarbCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1998
- In re BergyCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1979
- The Dow Chemical Company v. Astro-Valcour, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2001
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.