Cheese Systems, Inc. v. Tetra Pak Cheese & Powder Systems, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• “Obviousness cannot be based on the hindsight combination of components selectively culled from the prior art to fit the parameters of the patented invention.” (internal quotation marks omitted)
• “This court affirms on the ground that the accused products literally infringe this element and so does not reach the alternative ground of infringement under the doctrine of equivalents.”
• “This court affirms on the ground that the accused products literally infringe this element and so does not reach the alternative ground of infringement under the doctrine of equivalents.”
• “The district court correctly assessed that a plurality simply means two or more.”
• “The district court correctly assessed that a plurality simply means two or more.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).