In re Pearson

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• affirming § 103 rejection when § 102 rejection would also have been appropriate
• affirming § 103 rejection when § 102 rejection would also have been appropriate
• inventor’s recognition that prior-art compound inhibited defects in peanut plants did not suffice to grant patent protection on that compound
• intended use of an old composition does not render composition claim patentable
• intended use of an old composition does not render composition claim patentable
• intended use of an old composition does not render composition claim patentable

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

27 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

• Robert L. Jones and Labrado, Inc. v. Alex Hardy
  Federal Circuit· 1984-02-08· cited 130×
• In Re Schreiber
  Federal Circuit· 1997-12-17· cited 128×
• Cohesive Technologies, Inc. v. Waters Corp.
  Federal Circuit· 2008-10-07· cited 112×
• In Re Lonnie T. Spada and Joseph J. Wilczynski
  Federal Circuit· 1990-08-10· cited 64×
• In re May
  Customs and Patent Appeals· 1978-04-20· cited 43×
• Inre: Steve Morsa
  Federal Circuit· 2013-04-05· cited 32×
• In Re James T. Hamilton
  Federal Circuit· 1989-08-16· cited 27×
• In re Fracalossi
  Customs and Patent Appeals· 1982-06-24· cited 27×
• In re Best
  Customs and Patent Appeals· 1977-10-13· cited 22×
• In re Greenfield
  Customs and Patent Appeals· 1978-03-16· cited 17×
• Abbott Laboratories and Central Glass Company, Ltd. v. Baxter Pharmaceutical Products, Inc. And Baxter Healthcare Corp., Defendants-Cross
  Federal Circuit· 2007-01-16· cited 16×
• In re Avery
  Customs and Patent Appeals· 1975-06-26· cited 15×
• In re Johnson
  Customs and Patent Appeals· 1977-06-16· cited 15×
• In Re Klaus Heck
  Federal Circuit· 1983-02-14· cited 14×
• In Re James F. Crish and Richard L. Eckert (Serial No. 08/822,509)
  Federal Circuit· 2004-12-21· cited 14×
• Revlon, Inc. v. Carson Products Co.
  S.D. New York· 1985-03-21· cited 13×
• In re Oelrich
  Customs and Patent Appeals· 1978-06-15· cited 9×
• In re Skoner
  Customs and Patent Appeals· 1975-06-12· cited 4×
• In re Grose
  Customs and Patent Appeals· 1979-01-18· cited 4×
• In re Meyer
  Customs and Patent Appeals· 1979-06-07· cited 2×

Cites

10 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Kropa v. Robie
  Customs and Patent Appeals· 1951-02-06· cited 106×
• Application of Charles D. Prater and James Wei
  Customs and Patent Appeals· 1969-08-14· cited 100×
• In re Wiggins
  Customs and Patent Appeals· 1973-10-11· cited 26×
• Application of Max J. Kalm
  Customs and Patent Appeals· 1967-06-15· cited 16×
• Application of Robert M. Cole
  Customs and Patent Appeals· 1964-01-23· cited 15×
• Application of Theodore W. Zierden
  Customs and Patent Appeals· 1969-06-19· cited 13×
• Application of Alan J. Lemin, Arnolds Steinhards and Gerald A. Boyack
  Customs and Patent Appeals· 1964-01-23· cited 9×
• In re Echerd
  Customs and Patent Appeals· 1973-01-26· cited 7×
• Application of Ulrich Finsterwalder
  Customs and Patent Appeals· 1971-02-04· cited 5×
• In re Dailey
  Customs and Patent Appeals· 1973-06-28· cited 3×