Why Wasn't In re Hubbell Hubble v. Hubbell? (PDF)

Select a format

PDF :Electronic, 5 Pages
ISBN: 9781422429983
In Stock
Price
$63.00
QTY
International Order Inquiry

Product details

In re Hubbell, opinion by Circuit Judge O'Malley for a panel that also consisted of Circuit Judge Wallach; dissenting opinion by Circuit Judge Newman), is a common-assignee double patenting case that, in my opinion and apparently in the opinion of Circuit Judge Newman, should have been a patent-application interference.

 

Charles L. Gholz is a Partner in Oblon, Spivak, McClelland, Maier & Neustadt, LLP; Alexandria, Virginia. His direct dial telephone number is 703/412-6485, and his email address is cgholz@oblon.com.

 

Ask the LexisNexis experts - and get a complete answer based on today's law.

 

An authoritative analysis of important cases, codes, statutes, rulings, emerging issues or legal topics is available now - through LexisNexis Emerging Issues Analysis. The brain trust of LexisNexis authors - thousands of recognized authorities who develop the respected Matthew Bender®, Mealey's and Martindale-Hubbell® treatises and articles - produce this highly specific content. Each commentary covers an important case, code, statute, ruling or emerging issue such as subprime, nanotechnology, or climate change. More current and concentrated than treatises and more analytical than news, Emerging Issues Analysis bridges the information gap between the two, providing quick expert analysis of current developments in law.

 

Emerging Issues Analysis PDFs should be purchased individually or accessed through Lexis.com if you have a subscription.

 

(7103)