Legal Opinion
Stansbury v. Bond
Court of Customs and Patent Appeals
Decided August 16, 1973No. Patent Appeal No. 8902PublishedCited by 12 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
RICH, Judge.
This appeal is from ■ the decision of the Board of Patent Interferences awarding priority of invention to the senior party, Bond,1 on two grounds: (1) that the junior party Stansbury,2 had shown neither an actual reduction to practice of the invention prior to the date Bond constructively reduced the invention to practice by filing his patent application nor shown reasonable diligence from a time prior to conception of the invention by Bond, under 35 U.S.C. § 102(g); and (2) the ancillary ground that the disclosure of the invention in the Bond application supports the language of…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Hansgirg v. KemmerCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1939
- John Sherman Smith v. Charles Emory WehnCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1963
- Samuel P. McCutchen Jr., and Jack E. Eskilson v. Francis A. OliverCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1966
- Harold S. Hemstreet v. William S. RohlandCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1970
- Roy E. Ferree v. Harry D. Shephard, Jr. And Pearl Thelma Griffiths, Administratrix of the Estate of Norman J. GriffithsCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1967
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- The Perkin-Elmer Corporation v. Westinghouse Electric CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1987
- Peter J. Degeorge v. Donald R. BernierCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1985
- Reese v. HurstCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1981
- Fontijn v. OkamotoCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1975
- In re BaxterCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1981
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.