§

Patrick W. Kelly

13706036 - (R) (P.T.A.B. Jan. 29, 2020)
Patrick W. Kelly

4 Cited authorities

  1. Ashland Oil, v. Delta Resins Refractories

    776 F.2d 281 (Fed. Cir. 1985)   Cited 120 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "[w]hile the opinion testimony of a party having a direct interest in the pending litigation is less persuasive than opinion testimony by a disinterested party, it cannot be disregarded for that reason alone and may be relied upon when sufficiently convincing"

  2. Velander v. Garner

    348 F.3d 1359 (Fed. Cir. 2003)   Cited 61 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Reviewing the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences' finding of a reasonable expectation of success under a "substantial evidence" standard

  3. In re Lilienfeld

    21 C.C.P.A. 792 (C.C.P.A. 1933)   Cited 7 times

    Patent Appeal No. 3201. December 30, 1933. Appeal from the Board of Patent Appeals. Application for patent by Leon Lilienfeld. From a decision rejecting certain claims, the applicant appeals. Affirmed. Newton M. Perrins and Daniel I. Mayne, both of Rochester, N Y (Henry S. Boynton, of Rochester, N.Y., of counsel), for appellant. T.A. Hostetler, of Washington, D.C. (Howard S. Miller, of Washington, D.C., of counsel), for Commissioner of Patents. Before GRAHAM, Presiding Judge, and BLAND, HATFIELD

  4. Section 41.52 - Rehearing

    37 C.F.R. § 41.52   Cited 7 times   9 Legal Analyses

    (a) (1) Appellant may file a single request for rehearing within two months of the date of the original decision of the Board. No request for rehearing from a decision on rehearing will be permitted, unless the rehearing decision so modified the original decision as to become, in effect, a new decision, and the Board states that a second request for rehearing would be permitted. The request for rehearing must state with particularity the points believed to have been misapprehended or overlooked by