Prichard v. Setzler

ROBB, Associate Justice.

In this interference proceeding the Patent Office awarded priority of invention as to count 1 to Setzler, and as to count 2 to Prichard, but with instructions to the primary examiner that count 2 be rejected as unpatentable over count 1. From that decision these cross-appeals were taken.

The invention relates to a method of cracking oils, and count 1 reads as follows:

“1. A process for treating petroleum or its derivatives, which consists in introducing the same to a sealed retort, establishing and maintaining therein a temperature and pressure for cracking a gasoline…