Legal Opinion · Dissent
Avery v. Chase
Court of Customs and Patent Appeals
Decided January 23, 1939No. Patent Appeal 4000Published
1DissentBland, Associate Judge
It is not necessary for me to recite the facts involved in this interference proceeding since they are stated in the majority opinion and are, also stated in the original ex parte Chase Case.
Appellant Avery’s contentions here are that the present record makes it clear that the former Chase Case was erroneously decided and that controlling facts which appear in this record were not disclosed in the former record. While it may be said that the instant record makes clear certain facts which were not so clear in the former record, it is not thought that the differences between' the records…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Norwegian Nitrogen Products Co. v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1933
- Nesbit v. Riverside Independent DistrictSupreme Court of the United States · 1892
- Mason v. HepburnCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1898
- Blackford v. WilderDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1907
- International Cellucotton Products Co. v. CoeCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1936
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.