§

Cavanagh V. McMahon et al.

07271466 (B.P.A.I. Feb. 10, 1998)
Cavanagh V. McMahon et al.

32 Cited authorities

  1. Price v. Symsek

    988 F.2d 1187 (Fed. Cir. 1993)   Cited 318 times   7 Legal Analyses
    Holding that courts should consider all the evidence of conception and communication as a whole, not individually, and that "an inventor can conceivably prove prior conception by clear and convincing evidence although no one piece of evidence in and of itself establishes the prior conception."

  2. Biodex Corp. v. Loredan Biomedical, Inc.

    946 F.2d 850 (Fed. Cir. 1991)   Cited 151 times
    Holding that a party challenging jury instructions "has a twofold task must both prove the jury instructions read in their entirety were incorrect or incomplete as given and then demonstrate that the suggested instruction could have cured the error"

  3. Heat & Control, Inc. v. Hester Indus., Inc.

    785 F.2d 1017 (Fed. Cir. 1986)   Cited 172 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that appellate jurisdiction existed with respect to Northern District of West Virginia order granting a motion to quash a non–party subpoena in connection with a main action pending in the Northern District of California

  4. Estee Lauder Inc. v. L'Oreal

    129 F.3d 588 (Fed. Cir. 1997)   Cited 60 times
    Holding that reduction to practice does not occur until inventor knows embodiment will work for its intended purposes

  5. Hahn v. Wong

    892 F.2d 1028 (Fed. Cir. 1989)   Cited 44 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Corroborating evidence must be "independent of information received from the inventor"

  6. Holmwood v. Sugavanam

    948 F.2d 1236 (Fed. Cir. 1991)   Cited 33 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Finding prior reduction to practice in the United States based on domestic testing of a foreign fungicide, proof of which was established through oral testimony and test results

  7. Western Elec. Co., Inc. v. Piezo Technology

    860 F.2d 428 (Fed. Cir. 1988)   Cited 33 times
    Finding that "[i]t is permissible under [United States v.] Morgan[, 313 U.S. 409 (1941)] and its progeny to determine from an examiner whether a party had submitted certain information, or whether specific prior art was before the examiner"

  8. Bosies v. Benedict

    27 F.3d 539 (Fed. Cir. 1994)   Cited 16 times   2 Legal Analyses
    In Bosies, the documentary evidence of conception consisted of the inventor's laboratory notebook, disclosing a generic formula with the length of a hydrocarbon chain designated as "n."

  9. Abrutyn v. Giovanniello

    15 F.3d 1048 (Fed. Cir. 1994)   Cited 14 times
    Holding that an abuse of discretion occurs if the decision is clearly unreasonable or is based on erroneous conclusions of law

  10. Newkirk v. Lulejian

    825 F.2d 1581 (Fed. Cir. 1987)   Cited 17 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Requiring an actual reduction to practice and noting that proof of more than theoretical capability is required

  11. Rule 201 - Judicial Notice of Adjudicative Facts

    Fed. R. Evid. 201   Cited 30,135 times   26 Legal Analyses
    Holding "[n]ormally, in deciding a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim, courts must limit their inquiry to the facts stated in the complaint and the documents either attached to or incorporated in the complaint. However, courts may also consider matters of which they may take judicial notice."

  12. Section 102 - Conditions for patentability; novelty

    35 U.S.C. § 102   Cited 6,023 times   1024 Legal Analyses
    Prohibiting the grant of a patent to one who "did not himself invent the subject matter sought to be patented"

  13. Section 145 - Civil action to obtain patent

    35 U.S.C. § 145   Cited 506 times   133 Legal Analyses
    Granting 60 days within which to file for District Court review of the PTO's decision

  14. Section 104 - Repealed

    35 U.S.C. § 104   Cited 37 times   1 Legal Analyses

    35 U.S.C. § 104 Pub. L. 112-29, §3(d), Sept. 16, 2011, 125 Stat. 287 Section, act July 19, 1952, ch. 950, 66 Stat. 798; Pub. L. 93-596, §1, Jan. 2, 1975, 88 Stat. 1949; Pub. L. 94-131, §6, Nov. 14, 1975, 89 Stat. 691; Pub. L. 98-622, title IV, §403(a), Nov. 8, 1984, 98 Stat. 3392; Pub. L. 103-182, title III, §331, Dec. 8, 1993, 107 Stat. 2113; Pub. L. 103-465, title V, §531(a), Dec. 8, 1994, 108 Stat. 4982; Pub. L. 106-113, div. B, §1000(a)(9) [title IV, §4732(a)(10)(A)], Nov. 29, 1999, 113 Stat