U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Eiselstein v. Frank
This writing
- Type
- Opinion
- Author
- Alan David Lourie
- Filed
- April 11, 1995
- Case
- Eiselstein v. Frank
- Case status
- Decided
Opening text
The first passage of the document, as extracted by the source provider.
52 F.3d 1035 34 U.S.P.Q.2d 1467 Herbert L. EISELSTEIN, Jerry A. Harris, Darrell F. Smith, Jr., Edward F. Clatworthy, Stephen Floreen and Jeffrey M. Davidson, Appellants, v. Richard B. FRANK, Terry A. Debold, Sunil Widge and James W. Martin, Appellees. No. 94-1374. United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit. April 11, 1995. Francis J. Mulligan, Jr., Inco Patents and Licensing, Saddle Brook, NJ, argued for appellants. Francis A. Paintin, Woodcock Washburn Kurtz MacKiewica Norris, Philadelphia, PA, argued for appellees. Nancy J. Linck, Sol., Albin F. Drost, Deputy Sol. and Richard E. Schafer, Acting Associate Sol., Arlington, VA, were on the brief for amicus curiae, Comm'r of Patents and Trademarks. Before PLAGER, LOURIE, and SCHALL, Circuit Judges. LOURIE, Circuit Judge. 1 Herbert L. Eiselstein et al. appeal from a decision of the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences in interference number 102,601, holding claims 1-19 of United States Patent 4,788,036 unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. Sec. 102 (b). Because the Board properly denied Eiselstein et al. the benefit of an earlier application's filing date under 35 U.S.C. Sec. 120 with respect to claims 1-7 and 19, but erred in denyin…
Source Extract supplied by CourtListener. Benchlight does not host the document — read the authoritative text in the court's own PDF.