In Re John Ngai and David Lin

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that allowing claims where the printed matter was the only novel contribution would allow “anyone [to] continue patenting a product indefinitely provided that they add a new instruction sheet to the product”
• “[T]he printed matter in no way depends on the kit, and the kit does not depend on the printed matter.”
• “If we were to adopt [the applicant’s] position, anyone could continue patenting a product indefinitely provided that they add a new instruction sheet to the product.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).