The Federal ReporterWest Publishing Company, 1953 |
Результаты поиска по книге
Результаты 1 – 3 из 78
Стр. 185
... claim in application for patent is not controlled by fact that similar claims have been allowed in Patent Office , since an appealed claim must be patentable in its own right in opin- ion of the Court of Customs and Patent Appeals , but ...
... claim in application for patent is not controlled by fact that similar claims have been allowed in Patent Office , since an appealed claim must be patentable in its own right in opin- ion of the Court of Customs and Patent Appeals , but ...
Стр. 187
... claim all compounds except those of the prior art . In re Langdon , 77 F.2d 920 , 22 C.C.P.A. , Patents , 1245 ; In ... claim 48 was rejected as setting up an improper Markush group . The board affirmed all of these rejections for ...
... claim all compounds except those of the prior art . In re Langdon , 77 F.2d 920 , 22 C.C.P.A. , Patents , 1245 ; In ... claim 48 was rejected as setting up an improper Markush group . The board affirmed all of these rejections for ...
Стр. 188
... claim 17 is a broad generic claim in which appellants are seek- ing to establish a monopoly to all such cyclopentenolones , whether known or un- known , excepting the two prior art com- pounds which are recited in the italicised ...
... claim 17 is a broad generic claim in which appellants are seek- ing to establish a monopoly to all such cyclopentenolones , whether known or un- known , excepting the two prior art com- pounds which are recited in the italicised ...
Содержание
Judges VII | 19 |
Court of Claims Rules XLVII | 22 |
Text of Opinions 1 | 178 |
Авторские права | |
Не показаны другие разделы: 1
Другие издания - Просмотреть все
Часто встречающиеся слова и выражения
action affirmed agree agreement alleged allowed amended amount appellant's appellee application Atty authority Board cause charge Chief Judge Circuit Judge Cite as 205 City claim Company considered constituted contention contract corporation counsel Court of Appeals damages decision defendant denied determination directed District Court duty effect employees entered entitled evidence fact Federal filed finding further granted ground held holding income injuries Internal Revenue involved issue judgment June jury L.Ed Labor lights limited matter means ment motion negligence Office operation opinion paid parties patent payment period person petition petitioner plaintiff present prior proceedings production question reason received record reference Relations respect respondent result rule S.Ct statement statute sufficient taxpayer testimony tion trial union United United States Court verdict Washington witness York