Patents for Chemical Inventions

INDEX A Abandonment A d r e n a l i n case Adversary

20, 59 102, 103 72

process

Downloaded by 188.114.147.33 on August 18, 2015 | http://pubs.acs.org Publication Date: January 1, 1964 | doi: 10.1021/ba-1964-0046.ix001

A e r o s o l Research C o . v. S c o v i l l M f g . Co.

10

Affidavits 54 Agawam C o . v. Jordan 18 A j a x M e t a l C o . v . B r a d y Brass C o . . . 85 Alloys 64,109 Alternative protection 110 A l t o o n a Publixs Theaters Inc. v. T r i Ergon 22 A l u m i n u m C o . of America v . Sperry Products, Inc. 7 A m e r i c a n C y a n a m i d C o . case . . . . . . 104 Ames v. Lindstrom 50 A n a l o g s , patentability o f 73 ...

Anticipation . . . . Appeals A r c h e r v . Papa

65 .....57,69 45

Art 59 A r t i c l e patents 109 Artificial grouping 71 A s p i r i n cases 84,104 Assignment 35,55 A t l a n t i c & Pacific T e a C o . case 66 See also G r e a t A t l a n t i c & Pacific Tea Co.

Β Bac v. L o o m i s , 42 Bancroft v . W a t s o n 93 Becton-Dickinson & C o . v. R . T . Scherer C o r p . 17 Benecke, E x parte 49 Bergel, I n re 12 B e r k m a n and B e r k m a n case 103 22 9

Best t h o u g h t Birmingham v . Randall B l u e , J o h n C o . v. D e m p s t e r Mfg. Co. Boats, self-propelled

Mill

24 2

B o w e r s v. W o o d m a n

32

B r a d l e y , Judge B r a d y , E x parte Brainstorming

6 75 17 8 9

B r e m m e r , I n re Bros I n c . v. B r o w n i n g M f g . C o . . . . . B r o w n , E x parte B r o w n v . Edeler B u r g g r a f - B o c k e l m a n n , J o h n , and Strandskov, F . B . , patent

.

55 21 95

C C a r r i e r plus chemical . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Categories o f patents C e n t r a l Farmers F e r t i l i z e r C o

87 82 39

Chamberlain, G . D . , E x parte Change o f purpose

88 85

Chemical compounds 101 C h e m i c a l u t i l i t y . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 Chemicals, foreign patent c o v e r a g e . . 107 Claims Clark Thread C o . v. Willimantic Linen C o C i b a case Coca-Cola Cochrane v . Deener Coes, L o r i n g , J r . , I n re "Composed of" Compositions o f matter

62 33 108

28 88 11 64 64, 82, 101

"Comprising" Conception record "Conception"

64 54 63

C o n n e r v . Joris "Consisting o f " Consolazio, W . V . , patent Constitutional grant Continuation-in-part C o n t r i b u t o r y infringement

47 64 94 2 67 90

C o o l i d g e patent

64

C o r r e c t i o n o f errors Corroboration Crystalline f o r m patents

113 In Patents for Chemical Inventions; Lawson, E., et al.; Advances in Chemistry; American Chemical Society: Washington, DC, 1964.

71 23,42 83

114

PATENTS FOR CHEMICAL INVENTIONS


D

F r i d o l p h v . Bechik Fromberg, I n c . v . T h o r n h i l l . . .

Davidson, In re 55 D a v i s v. C a r r i e r 17 DDT 108 Dennis v. P i t n e r 103 D i d u s c h , W . P . , patent . . . . . . . . . . . . 92 D i s c l a i m e r . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70 Disclosure 63 D i l i g e n c e . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42 Dinwiddie v . St. Louis & O T a l l o n Coal C o 35 D o c u m e n t s , f o r m a l . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49 D o d s o n , In r e 9 Dosselman a n d N e y m a n n . . . . . . . . . . 60 D r . Salisbury Laboratories v . I . D . Russell C o 87 Druey and Schmidt, In re . 10 Drugs ..................61,111 d u P o n t de N e m o u r s & C o . v . U n i t e d States 28 D u d d y v. Solomon 45 D u n m o r e . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 D w i g h t & L l o y d s Sintering C o . v . Greennalt 20

Ε Electric welding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Ellis, Carlton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . E l l i s , In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . "Embodiment" "Essential" Ether . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Exclusive right E x t e n d e d technical arms . . . . . . . . . . Extraction . . . . . ...............

66 60 60 63 63 2 1 16 109

F Farbenfabriken

o f Elberfeld C o . v .

Kuehmsted 84 Ferguson, Α . , J r . , patent . . . . . . . . . . 87 Field 54 F i l i n g fee 49 Finish-remover . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60 F i n k patent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 F i n l e y , I n re 11 Fisher, In r e . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84 Fitch, John . . . . . . . ............ 2 Fluorescents 109 Foods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . · Ill F o r e i g n patent coverage . . . . . . . . . . . 107

45 87

G Gaiser v . L i n d e r 45 G e n e r a l C h e m i c a l C o . v. Standard Wholesale P h o s p h a t e & A c i d Works 18 General Electric . . . . . . . . . . 101 G e n e r i c c l a i m . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62 Genus 62 G i l l v . U.S. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 G o o d y e a r C o . v . Ray-O-Vac C o . . . 9 G r a v e r T a n k M f g . C o . v. L i n d e A i r Products 67 G r a y patent 64 G r a y , I n re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51 G r e a t A t l a n t i c a n d Pacific T e a C o . v. Supermarket E q u i p m e n t C o r p . 7 See also A t l a n t i c & Pacific T e a C o . G r e i f , M a r t i n , patent 94 G r i m m e , I n re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60 G r u s k i n , Benjamin, patent . . . . . . . . . 87 Gustavson, E x parte 55 G u t h v. M i n n e s o t a M i n i n g & M a n u facturing Co. . . . . 37 G y s i n , H a n s , a n d Knusli, E n r i c o , patent

91

H H a r d i n g v. Steingiser & Salyer . . . . 44 Harrison and Packman, E x p a r t e . . . . 9 Hartop a n d Brandes, I n re . . . . . . . . 9,45 H ass, I n re 11 H e i n z e , E x parte 50 H e n k e l , E x parte 11 H e n z e , I n re 11 H e r r , I n r e . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 Hessel, E x parte 88 H e y w o o d - W a k e f i e l d C o . v. S m a l l . . 31 H o f f m a n , F e l i x , patent . . . . . . . . 84 H o f m a n n , A l b e r t , a n d Troxler, F r a n z , patent 92 H o m o l o g s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10, 73,77 H o p k i n s , Samuel 2 H o s k i n s v . G e n e r a l E l e c t r i c . . . . . . . 86 H o t c h k i s s v. G r e e n w o o d 9 H o u g h t o n v . U n i t e d States 34 H u y l & Patterson v. M c D o w e l l C o . ,

In Patents for Chemical Inventions; Lawson, E., et al.; Advances in Chemistry; American Chemical Society: Washington, DC, 1964.

115


INDEX

"Illustrative" 63 Improvement 59 Incandescent L a m p case . . . . . . . . . . 60 Inducement t o infringe . . . . . . . . 90 Infringement 60,66 Interference . . . . . . . . .41, 57 c h r o n o l o g i c a l procedure 43 Interpretation . . . . . . . . . ... 57,65 Invalidity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68 See also V a l i d i t y Invention 61 elements . . 42 i n special fields . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I l l standard o f . . . . . . . . . ., . . 13 Inventor entity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 Inventor, w r o n g 19 Inventorship 15 Intervening r i g h t 71 Isenstead v . W a t s o n . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 , 6 2 Isomers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73,77

Lane & B o d l e y C o . v . L o c k e Larsen, I n re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Larsen P r o d u c t s C o r p . v . Perfect Paint P r o d u c t s , I n c . . . . . . . . . . . . L e g a l requirements L e v i n e v . U n i t e d States Levy I J n d e A i r P r o d u c t s v.. G r a v e r T a n k Mfg. Co. Livingston, Robert L o c a t i o n o f use . ......... L o h r and S p u r l i n , I n re ,

30 12 24 1,4 54 9 67 2 89 12

L o w e l l . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 L u n g b e r g , I n re 11 L y o n v . G e n e r a l M o t o r s C o r p . . . . . . . 89

M

M ah η v . H a r w o o d . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Manufacturers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94 M a r k u s h claims . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70 M a r s h N i c h r o m e patent . . . . . . . . . . . 65 Maytag C o . v . M u r r a y Corp. of j A m e r i c a . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 M c C l u r g v . K i n g s l a n d . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 Jaffee a n d O g d e n v . Kassley . . . . . . . 9 M e a n i n g o f c h e m i c a l patents . . . . . . 57 Jepson, E x parte .. 93 Medicines ......................61,111 J o i n t invention . . . . . . . . .. . 20 foreign patent coverage . . . . . . . . . 107 J o i n t inventors, order o f names o f . . 24 M e r g e n t h a l e r v . Scudder . . . . . . . . . . 16 Jones, K e n n e d y , and R o t e r m u n d Metallurgy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64 patent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66 Method 59 Jungersen v . O s t b y & B a r t o n C o . . . . 1.3 M i c r o b i o l o g i c a l products . . . . . . . . 9 9 , 1 0 4 M i l l e r , E x parte . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 3 , 50 Κ M i l l s , I n re V i c t o r . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12,96 M i n e r a l Separation v . H y d e . . . . . . . . 18 K a l o Inoculant C o . v . F u n k B r o s . M i s j o i n d e r , hazards o f . . . . , — . . . 24 Seed C o 19 M i x e d Crystals 109 K e n d a l l C o , v . T e t l e y T e a C o . . . . . 23 M i x t u r e s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109,110 K i n g case . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102 Moler & Adams v. Purdy 43 K l e i n m a n v. Betty D a i n C r e a t i o n s . . 54 M o n s a n t o C h e m i c a l C o . v . M i l l e r . . . 38 K o c h v. L i e b e r . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45 Morehouse, N . F . , & M a y f i e l d , O . J . , K r e m e n t z v . S. Cottle C o 9 patent 87 K r i m m e l , In re 9,62 M o r s e case 100 K u e h m s t e d v . Farbenfabriken of E l Morton, D r . . . . . . . . . . ......... 2 berfeld C o . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 4 , 1 0 1 , 1 0 2 M or w a y , B e e r b o w e r & Z i m m e r v . K u h n e Identifying Systems I n c . v . Bondi 42 U n i t e d States » 19 - " M u l t i p l i c i t y " . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63 K y r i d e s v . Bruson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45

L L a b o r a t o r y testing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . L a m b o o y , In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

M 44 12

N a t u r a l products . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 9 N e l s o n a n d Shabika case . . . . . . . . . . 8 , 6 1


PATENTS FOR CHEMICAL INVENTIONS


116

N e w matter 67 N e w use 11 Nichols v. Atkinson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Nielsen v. Cahill . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 Nitrogen-fixing bugs 19 Nonjoinder, hazards o f . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 Nonpatentable discovery . . . . . . . . . . 2 Novak and Hogue, In re . . . . . . . . . . 9 Novelty 4,78

Process claims 88 patents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59,108 Proof of utility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 4 , 1 1 2 Prusak . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Purity alone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85 Pyrene Mfg. C o . v. Boy ce . . . . . . . . 33 Pyrophoric alloy . ......... 62

Ο

Radio Position Finding Corp. v . Bendix Corp. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81 Randolph, Edmund . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57 Records 53 Reduction to practice . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 2 , 4 4 Rehearing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70 Reifsnyder, E x parte . . . . . . . . . . 55 Reiner v. The I. Leon Co., Inc. . . . . 13 Reissue . . . . . . 70 Restrictive Trade Practices Commis sion Ill Rhodes, E x parte 49 Riden and Flavin, In re . . . . . . . . . . 11,95 Rodin v. Spalding 44 Rothermel and Waddell, Jr., In r e . . 10 Rule 71 61 Rule 75 ..........62,68 Rules 131 and 132 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54 Rules of general application . . . . . . 96 Rules of practice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63 R y stan Co. v . Warren-Teed Products Co., Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87

Oath 49,50 Objects of the invention 66 Obviousness 74 See also Unobviousness Official rules . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58 O'Reilly v. Morse ..18,100 Ownership . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27, 32

Ρ Palmquist and Erwin, In re 9 Papers, formal 49 Papesch, In re Viktor . . . . . . . . . . 8 , 7 5 , 8 2 Parke-Davis v. Mulford 102 Patent Acts 2 Patent Code of 1952 . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 0 , 106 Patent Law, First U.S. . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 Patentability 7 Patenting abroad 112 Patents, first American . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 , 5 7 Pearl ash 2,58 Petering and Fall, In re 12 Petition 49,52 Pfeiffer, F . L . , patent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 83 Pharmaceutical applications 62 Phillips Petroleum Co. v. Ladd 94 Pieroh and Weeres, In re . . . . . . . . 11,88 Pigments . . . . 109 Plant isolates .99,103 "Plurality" 63 Pointer v. Six W h e e l Corp. . . 19 Potash and pearl ash . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Power of attorney 51 "Preferably" .60,63 Preliminary statement . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53 amendment 43 Principle of nature 99 Prior art references . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 Priority of invention . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42 Products of nature . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99

R

S Salathiel, E x parte . . . . . . . . . . . . 93 Salt 2 Santmyer, E x parte . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88 Schaefer, Inc., v. Mohawk Cabinet Co., Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 Scherer, E x parte . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90 Schluchter, E x parte . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55 Secrecy provision . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 Section 33 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68 Section 101 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 , 6 1 Section 100(b) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65 Section 103 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 , 5 9 Section 112 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61 Semiconductors 109 Shell Development v. Watson 86 Shop right 29 Short form 53


INDEX

117

Silicates .. Six-wheel truck , . ............. Smith Brothers cough drops Snell, E x parte . . . . . ........... Solomons v. United States Solutions Special purity Species . . . . . . . ................ "Specific embodiment" Standard Parts Co. v . Peck Statutory changes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Steelmand, E x parte, S. L . , and Kell,


T. L.

Steinberg, M . D . , patent . . . . . . . . . . Steroid Structure in compositions "Subject matter as a whole" . . . . . . "Subject matter sought to be pat ented" . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . "Substantially" . . . . . . . . . . . ..... Symington C o . v. National Castings Co. · Szwarc, In re ,

68 19 28 103 30 109 84 62 59 33 81 85 92 61 94 74 74 63 33 8

United Chromium v. General Motors Corp. . . . . . . . 16 United Shirt & Collar Co. v. Beattie 22 United States v. Dubilier Condenser Corp 29 United States v. Solomons . . . . . . . . 34 Unobviousness 5,9, 59,106

See also Obviousness Use to be claimed as process . . 88 Utility 5,23,61,105 contemplated . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44 proof of , .....44,112 requirements of 8 ultimate use doctrine 45

V Validity ............7,66 See also Invalidity Van Otteren v. Hafner 24 Visible fingerprints . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 V o n Bramer & Ruggles, In re 95 Vrooman v. Penhallow . . . . . . . . . . . . 22

Τ Tanczyn, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85 Tansel, In re 17 Tea bag container . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 Teppema, E x parte . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55 Tetracycline case 104 Thropp & Son v. D e L a s k i and Thropp Circular Woven Tire Co. ....21,24 Thuau, In re . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .96,104 Tracer lab Inc. v. Industrial Nucle onics Corp 16 Trade secrets .28, 36, 38 Treatment of animals 91 Treatment of human body 91 Tolbutamide 110 Tolkmith 61 Twentier's Research Inc. v. Hollister Inc. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 Tungsten, metallurgy of 64 Tungsten case 101

U U d y patent Union Carbide case

16 66

W W a r p v. Warp . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Washington, George . . Welsbach patent . . . . . . .... Westinghouse Electric Co. v. Mont gomery W e ver v . G o o d & Putzrath . . . . . . . . W i c k wire Spencer Steel C o Widmann, R . R., patent . . . . . . . . . . . Wilke and Pfohl, In re Willard, J . R., and Maiden, E . G . . . Winslow, Samuel Wiswall, R. H . , Jr., patent W r i t of certiorari W r o n g inventor named

60 57 62 68 42 32 87 8 92 2 83 69 19

Y

Yale and Bernstein, E x parte . . . . . .

84

Ζ Zbornik and Peterson, E x parte . . . .


91

Patents for Chemical Inventions

Recommend Documents