§

Ex parte Weber et al.

08071690 (B.P.A.I. Feb. 26, 1998)
Ex parte Weber et al.

3 Cited authorities

  1. Application of Henze

    181 F.2d 196 (C.C.P.A. 1950)   Cited 26 times

    Patent Appeal No. 5659. Argued January 13, 1950. Decided April 3, 1950. Whittemore, Hulbert Belknap, Washington, D.C. (L. Gaylord Hulbert, Detroit, Mich., and George A. Degnan, Washington, D.C., of counsel) for appellant. E.L. Reynolds, Washington, D.C. (J. Schimmel, Washington, D.C., of counsel) for the Commissioner of Patents. Before GARRETT, Chief Judge, and JACKSON, O'CONNELL and JOHNSON, Judges. JOHNSON, Judge. On May 15, 1944, the appellant filed an application in the United States Patent Office

  2. Application of Jones

    149 F.2d 501 (C.C.P.A. 1945)   Cited 7 times

    Patent Appeal No. 4975. February 7, 1945. Rehearing Denied May 22, 1945. Appeal from the Board of Appeals of the United States Patent Office, Serial No. 378,975. Proceeding in the matter of the application of Franklin D. Jones for a patent for compositions of matter used as insecticides, fungicides, and growth regulants for plants. From a decision of the Board of Appeals affirming that of the examiner rejecting all claims of the application, the applicant appeals. Affirmed in part and reversed in

  3. Section 103 - Conditions for patentability; non-obvious subject matter

    35 U.S.C. § 103   Cited 6,130 times   479 Legal Analyses
    Holding the party seeking invalidity must prove "the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains."