Legal Opinion
In re Jolles
Court of Customs and Patent Appeals
Decided July 31, 1980No. Appeal No. 80-510PublishedCited by 11 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
BALDWIN, Judge.
This appeal is from the decision of the Patent and Trademark Office Board of Appeals (board) affirming the examiner’s rejection of claims 7-14, 16, 27-34 and 361 under 35 U.S.C. § 1012 and 35 U.S.C. § 112, first paragraph,3 for lack of proof of utility. We reverse.
Background
Composition claims 7-14 and 16 encompass certain pharmaceutical compositions *1323useful for the treatment of acute myeloblastic leukemia which comprise certain naphthacene derivatives. Method claims 27-34 and 36 encompass methods for the treatment of acute myeloblastic leukemia in a human patient by…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Application of Franz Bergel and John Albert StockCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1961
- Application of Carl Peter KrimmelCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1961
- In re ChilowskyCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1956
- In re NovakCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1962
- In re GardnerCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1973
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- In Re Miguel F. Brana, Jose M.C. Berlanga, Marina M. Moset, Erich Schlick and Gerhard KeilhauerCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1995
- Grunenthal Gmbh v. Alkem Laboratories LimitedCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2019
- Peter E. Cross v. Kinji IizukaCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1985
- In Re Dane K. Fisher and Raghunath v. LalgudiCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2005
- Petito v. Puritan's Pride, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 2014
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.