1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. F.3d
  4. 485 F.3d
  5. 485 F.3d 1370 (2007)
 

HENKEL CORP. v. PROCTER & GAMBLE CO.

No. 2006-1542. (Interference No. 105,174).

485 F.3d 1370 (2007)

HENKEL CORPORATION, Appellant, v. The PROCTER & GAMBLE COMPANY, Appellee.

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.

May 11, 2007.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Rudolf E. Hutz, Connolly Bove Lodge & Hutz LLP, of Wilmington, Delaware, argued for appellant. With him on the brief were Robert G. McMorrow, Jr., and Aaron R. Ettelman. Of counsel was Mark E. Freeman.

Mark A. Charles, The Procter & Gamble Company, of Cincinnati, Ohio, argued for appellee.

Before GAJARSA, LINN, and MOORE, Circuit Judges.

LINN, Circuit Judge.

Henkel Corporation ("Henkel") appeals from a judgment by the United States Patent & Trademark Office Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences ("Board") awarding priority in Interference No. 105,174 to the Procter & Gamble Company ("Proctor & Gamble"). Because the Board legally erred in imposing a requirement for reduction to practice not warranted by the language of the interference count, and because the Board's factual findings...

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