The United States Patents Quarterly, 64. sējumsAssociated Industry Publications, 1945 |
No grāmatas satura
1.–3. rezultāts no 79.
193. lappuse
... filed Oct. 20 , 1939 , and John G. Bright , appli- cation filed Jan. 5 , 1940. From decision awarding priority to Gray , Fife appeals . Affirmed . ALMON S. NELSON , Richmond , Va . ( WILLIAM B. WHARTON , Pittsburgh , Pa . , of counsel ) ...
... filed Oct. 20 , 1939 , and John G. Bright , appli- cation filed Jan. 5 , 1940. From decision awarding priority to Gray , Fife appeals . Affirmed . ALMON S. NELSON , Richmond , Va . ( WILLIAM B. WHARTON , Pittsburgh , Pa . , of counsel ) ...
195. lappuse
... filing date . In his preliminary statement Fife made reference to a former preliminary statement evidently filed by him follow- ing the declaration of the original inter- ference , reiterated the allegations there- in made and added ...
... filing date . In his preliminary statement Fife made reference to a former preliminary statement evidently filed by him follow- ing the declaration of the original inter- ference , reiterated the allegations there- in made and added ...
605. lappuse
... filing client's application for more than two years and until application had no value to client ; client's application was not filed , but attorney filed application in own name and obtained patent ; attorney is estopped to assert that ...
... filing client's application for more than two years and until application had no value to client ; client's application was not filed , but attorney filed application in own name and obtained patent ; attorney is estopped to assert that ...
Saturs
ternational Braid Co CCA | 1 |
92 | 7 |
Richfield Oil Corp Black v | 12 |
Autortiesības | |
60 citas sadaļas nav parādītas.
Citi izdevumi - Skatīt visu
Bieži izmantoti vārdi un frāzes
acid action affirmed alleged allowed amount Appeals application associated Board called cause Circuit claims combination Company complaint connection considered containing contract Corporation cover Decided decision decree defendant defendant's denied described determine device directed disclosed disclosure dismissed District Court effect Electric elements evidence examiner fact fibers filed follows further glass granted ground held holding individual infringement interference invalid invention involved issue Judge judgment license limited lines machine manufacture material matter means ment metal method motion motor operation opinion original Particular parties Patent Office plaintiff portion position practice present pressure prior prior art question reason record reference refused registration rejected relates respect result royalties Rule similar specification substantially sufficient suit surface tion trade mark United USPQ validity York