In Re Comiskey

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that Chenery permits res- olution of legal issue which is not “‘a determination of pol- icy or judgment which the agency alone is authorized to make’”
• “[M]ental processes—or pro- cesses of human thinking—standing alone are not patent- able even if they have practical application.”
• “[M]ental processes—or pro- cesses of human thinking—standing alone are not patent- able even if they have practical application.”
• “Only if the requirements of § 101 are satisfied is the inventor allowed to pass through to the other require- ments for patentability, such as novelty under § 102 and . . . non-obviousness under § 103.” (citations and internal quotation marks omitted)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).