Legal Opinion
Meitzner v. Mindick
Court of Customs and Patent Appeals
Decided February 24, 1977No. Patent Appeal No. 76-577PublishedCited by 11 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MILLER, Judge.
The junior party, Meitzner and Oline (Meitzner),1 appeals from the decision2 of the Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) Board of Patent Interferences (board) awarding priority of the invention described in the ten counts in issue to the senior party, Mindick and Svarz (Mindick).3 We affirm.
The Invention
The invention involves a process of making porous copolymer beads and of forming these beads into anion-exchange resins; also, the copolymer-bead and anion-exchange-resin products. Counts 1-6 are directed to a process of making porous copolymer beads, with counts 5 and 6 further…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Alyeska Pipeline Service Co. v. Wilderness SocietySupreme Court of the United States · 1975
- F. D. Rich Co. v. United States Ex Rel. Industrial Lumber Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1974
- Fleischmann Distilling Corp. v. Maier Brewing Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Myers v. FeigelmanCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1972
- International Cellucotton Products Co. v. CoeCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1936
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Knorr v. PearsonCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1982
- In re BaxterCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1981
- Old Swiss House, Inc. v. Anheuser-Busch, Inc.Court of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1978
- Gunter v. StreamCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1978
- Weil v. FritzCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1979
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.