47 Cited authorities

  1. Warner-Jenkinson Co. v. Hilton Davis Chemical

    520 U.S. 17 (1997)   Cited 1,692 times   32 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "[t]he determination of equivalence should be applied as an objective inquiry on an element-by-element basis"
  2. Festo Corp. v. Shoketsu Kinzoku Kogyokabushiki Co.

    535 U.S. 722 (2002)   Cited 809 times   37 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "[t]he scope of a patent is not limited to its literal terms but instead embraces all equivalents to the claims described," because "[t]he language in the patent claims may not capture every nuance of the invention or describe with complete precision the range of its novelty."
  3. Diamond v. Diehr

    450 U.S. 175 (1981)   Cited 522 times   130 Legal Analyses
    Holding a procedure for molding rubber that included a computer program is within patentable subject matter
  4. Diamond v. Chakrabarty

    447 U.S. 303 (1980)   Cited 402 times   83 Legal Analyses
    Holding claims patent-eligible where "the patentee has produced a new bacterium with markedly different characteristics from any found in nature and one having the potential for significant utility"
  5. Gottschalk v. Benson

    409 U.S. 63 (1972)   Cited 494 times   59 Legal Analyses
    Holding claim involving mathematical formula invalid under § 101 that did not preempt a mathematical formula
  6. Eldred v. Ashcroft

    537 U.S. 186 (2003)   Cited 189 times   6 Legal Analyses
    Holding that “every idea, theory, and fact in a copyrighted work becomes instantly available for public exploitation at the moment of publication.”
  7. Parker v. Flook

    437 U.S. 584 (1978)   Cited 367 times   63 Legal Analyses
    Holding narrow mathematical formula unpatentable
  8. Amgen Inc. v. Hoechst Marion Roussel, Inc.

    314 F.3d 1313 (Fed. Cir. 2003)   Cited 502 times   14 Legal Analyses
    Holding that “non-naturally occurring” and “not isolated” were structural elements defining the source of the claimed material, rather than steps for obtaining it
  9. Merck KGaA v. Integra Lifesciences I, Ltd.

    545 U.S. 193 (2005)   Cited 100 times   28 Legal Analyses
    Holding that uses which are not ultimately included in a submission to the FDA are nonetheless exempted by the safe harbor
  10. In re Bilski

    545 F.3d 943 (Fed. Cir. 2008)   Cited 269 times   40 Legal Analyses
    Holding that non-preemption under the second step of what was then called the "Freeman –Walter –Abele test" requires that the claim be "tied to a particular machine or bring about a particular transformation of a particular article"
  11. Section 112 - Specification

    35 U.S.C. § 112   Cited 7,255 times   1014 Legal Analyses
    Requiring patent applications to include a "specification" that provides, among other information, a written description of the invention and of the manner and process of making and using it
  12. Section 103 - Conditions for patentability; non-obvious subject matter

    35 U.S.C. § 103   Cited 6,044 times   441 Legal Analyses
    Holding the party seeking invalidity must prove "the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains."
  13. Section 271 - Infringement of patent

    35 U.S.C. § 271   Cited 6,004 times   1035 Legal Analyses
    Holding that testing is a "use"
  14. Section 282 - Presumption of validity; defenses

    35 U.S.C. § 282   Cited 3,878 times   132 Legal Analyses
    Granting a presumption of validity to patents
  15. Section 101 - Inventions patentable

    35 U.S.C. § 101   Cited 3,367 times   2181 Legal Analyses
    Defining patentable subject matter as "any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof."
  16. Section 201 - Bribery of public officials and witnesses

    18 U.S.C. § 201   Cited 1,854 times   80 Legal Analyses
    Using "proceeding" to refer to trials, hearings, or the like "before any court, any committee of either House or both Houses of Congress, or any agency, commission, or officer"
  17. Section 301 - Citation of prior art and written statements

    35 U.S.C. § 301   Cited 117 times   15 Legal Analyses
    Referring to “the proper meaning of a patent claim in a proceeding that is ordered or instituted pursuant to section 304, 314, or 324 ”
  18. Section 203 - Compensation to Members of Congress, officers, and others in matters affecting the Government

    18 U.S.C. § 203   Cited 97 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Barring government employees from receiving fees for representing a party against the government
  19. Section 161 - Patents for plants

    35 U.S.C. § 161   Cited 41 times   20 Legal Analyses

    Whoever invents or discovers and asexually reproduces any distinct and new variety of plant, including cultivated sports, mutants, hybrids, and newly found seedlings, other than a tuber propagated plant or a plant found in an uncultivated state, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title. The provisions of this title relating to patents for inventions shall apply to patents for plants, except as otherwise provided. 35 U.S.C. § 161 July 19, 1952, ch. 950

  20. Section 162 - Description, claim

    35 U.S.C. § 162   Cited 13 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Exempting plant patents from § 112"if the description is as complete as is reasonably possible"