Boyce v. Anderson

405 F.2d 605 160 U.S.P.Q. 180 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. Nos. 22163, 22163-A. United States Court of Appeals Ninth Circuit. Dec. 16, 1968, Rehearing Denied in No. 22163 Jan. 13, 1969. 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. * HAMLEY, Circuit Judge: 1 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 patent on this invention on August 6, 1956, and Boyce applied for a patent on substantially the same invention on June 10, 1957. Both…