Hoechst Celanese Corporation v. Bp Chemicals Limited and Sterling Chemicals, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• stating that a grant of a request for reexamination does not establish a likelihood of patent invalidity
• “[G]rant by the examiner of a request for reexamination is not probative of unpatentability.”
• “We share the district court’s view that it is unlikely that an inventor would define the invention in a way that excluded the preferred embodiment, or that persons of skill in this field would read the specification in such a way.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).