Azzerone v. W. B. Coon Co.

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that objective evidence of non- obviousness must be “considered collectively” with evi- dence of obviousness, may not be “after-the-fact consider- ations” and may not be “relegated to ‘secondary status’”
• “Failure of others ‘to find a solution to the problem which the patent[] in question purports] to solve’ is evidence of nonobvi-ousness.” (citation omitted)
• “Dr. Schneller . . . agreed that when a lead compound is selected, a chemist would seek to make conservative changes to that structure.”
• “No witness testified that the [low toxicity] of the drug would have been ‘un expected. ”
• “No witness testified that the [low toxicity] of the drug would have been ‘unex- pected.’”
• “With [the alleged infringer] having met its burden to establish a prima facie case of obviousness, the Court will go on to consider the fourth Graham factor: facts regarding objective indicia of nonobviousness.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).