BOYCE v. ANDERSON

Nos. 22163, 22163-A.

405 F.2d 605 (1968)

John A. BOYCE, an individual, and FMC Corporation, a corporation, Appellants and Cross-Appellees, v. Earl R. ANDERSON, an individual, and Filper Corporation, a corporation, Appellees and Cross-Appellants.

United States Court of Appeals Ninth Circuit.

Rehearing Denied January 13, 1969.


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Lewis E. Lyon (argued), of Lyon & Lyon, Los Angeles, Cal., for appellants and cross-appellees.

Dirks B. Foster (argued), and Harold R. Regan of Boyken, Mohler, Foster & Schlemmer, San Francisco, Cal., for appellees and cross-appellants.

Before HAMLEY and BROWNING, Circuit Judges, and THOMPSON, District Judge.


Rehearing Denied in No. 22163 January 13, 1969.

HAMLEY, Circuit Judge:

This action stems from an interference proceeding before the Patent Office, pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 135 (1964), to determine priority of invention. In question was the priority of invention of a method of pitting peaches as conceived by John A. Boyce and Earl R. Anderson, both of whom were parties to the interference proceeding.1 Anderson applied for a...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases