Legal Opinion
Peeler v. Miller
Court of Customs and Patent Appeals
Decided June 10, 1976No. Patent Appeal No. 76-503PublishedCited by 22 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
RICH, Judge.
The senior party, Peeler, Godfrey, and Furby (Peeler),1 appeals from the decision of the Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) Board of Patent Interferences (board), one member dissenting, awarding priority of in*649vention in five counts to the junior party, Miller.2 We reverse.
The Subject Matter
Counts 6 and 8 adequately describe the subject matter:
6. A power transmission fluid consisting essentially of a major portion of a phosphate ester having a tendency to cause cavitation erosion damage, and as an additive effective in reducing such damage, from 0.01 to 10% by weight of a halocarbon…
2Cases cited25 opinions
- Towne v. EisnerSupreme Court of the United States · 1918
- Mason v. HepburnCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1898
- In re ClarkCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1975
- Joshua C. Conner v. George G. JorisCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1957
- Young v. DworkinCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1974
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by22 opinions
- Apotex Usa, Inc. v. Merck & Co., Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2001
- Yoshihiro Fujikawa, Mikio Suzuki, Hiroshi Iwasaki, Mitsuaki Sakashita and Masaki Kitahara v. Sompong Wattanasin, (Two Cases)Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1996
- Frank E. Paulik and Robert G. Schultz v. Nabil Rizkalla and Charles N. WinnickCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1985
- The Dow Chemical Company v. Astro-Valcour, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2001
- John H. Bruning v. Ryusho HiroseCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1998
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.