Legal Opinion
In re Angstadt
Court of Customs and Patent Appeals
Decided June 24, 1976No. Patent Appeal No. 75-560PublishedCited by 34 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
BALDWIN, Judge.
This appeal is from the decision of the Patent and Trademark Office Board of Appeals affirming the rejection of claims 3-5, 12-22, and 27 in application serial No. 772,-421, filed October 31, 1968, for “Organometallic Complexes As Alkylaromatic Oxidation Catalysts.” We reverse.
The Invention
The claimed invention involves a method of catalytically oxidizing secondary or tertiary alkylaromatic hydrocarbons to form a reaction mixture comprising the corresponding hydroperoxides. The method employs as the catalyst an organometallic complex formed between hexaalkylphosphoramides and…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Carnegie Steel Co. v. Cambria Iron Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1902
- Minerals Separation, Ltd. v. HydeSupreme Court of the United States · 1916
- Mowry v. WhitneySupreme Court of the United States · 1871
- IVES v. HamiltonSupreme Court of the United States · 1876
- Application of Joseph D. FisherCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1970
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by34 opinions
- W.L. Gore & Associates, Inc., Appellant/cross-Appellee v. Garlock, Inc., Appellee/cross-AppellantCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1983
- Atlas Powder Company v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Company and Alamo Explosives Company, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1984
- The Regents of the University of California v. Eli Lilly and CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1997
- Amgen, Inc., Plaintiff/cross-Appellant v. Chugai Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd., and Genetics Institute, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1991
- Studiengesellschaft Kohle Mbh, as Trustee for the Max-Planck-Institut Fur Kohlenforschung v. Eastman Kodak CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1980
29 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.