Legal Opinion

Joseph Chedaker, George Gilbert Hoberg and Eugene Arthur Sands v. Arthur W. Lo

Court of Customs and Patent Appeals

Decided June 20, 1963No. Patent Appeal 6921PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ALMOND, Judge.

This appeal is from the decision of the Board of Patent Interferences which awarded priority of invention in Interference No. 89,337 to the junior party Lo, patentee named in U. S. Patent 2,818,555. 1 Appellants Chedaker et al. are senior by virtue of the earlier filing date of their application 2 in which claims 8 and 12 of the Lo patent, corresponding to the counts in issue, were copied and added by amendment. The board found no support in the Chedaker et al. application for the copied claims.

The counts relate to a magnetic device and associated windings useful in the storage…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Creed v. PottsCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1938
  2. Neumair v. MalocsayCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1935
  3. Peterson v. SchatzelCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1942
  4. Weintraub v. HewittCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1912

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Rion v. AultCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1973
  2. Dalton H. Pritchard v. Donald RichmanCourt of Customs and Patent Appeals · 1966

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API