Heidbrink v. McKesson
Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit
1Opinion of the Court
HICKENLOOPER, Circuit Judge.
A patent having theretofore issued to plaintiff-appellant, certain claims therein were placed in interference with the chums of defendant-appellee’s then pending application. Priority was awarded defendant-appellee, and this decision was affirmed by the Board of Appeals. No appeal was thereupon prosecuted to the Court of Customs and Patent Appeals, but, instead of so appealing, plaintiff-appellant instituted this action in the District Court, claiming the right' to do so by virtue of Rev. St. § 4915 (35 U. S. C. § 63 [35 USCA § 63])1 as it is contended such section…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- MacGregor v. ChesterfieldDistrict Court, E.D. Michigan · 1929
3Cited by10 opinions
- Christensson v. HogdalCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1952
- United States Ex Rel. White v. CoeCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1938
- Duplex Envelope Co. v. Denominational Envelope Co.Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1935
- Wettlaufer v. RobinsCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1937
- Syracuse Washing Mach. Corp. v. VieauCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1934
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.