In Re Josephus J.M. Braat

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that while “[a] better characterization of the relationship between the inventions is as combination/subcombination,” the reasoning of Borah is applicable
• determining that application claims were pat-entably distinct from claims of a patent under a two-way test, again without reference to any “prior art”
• concluding, under the first, or one-way, part of a two-way test, that the omission from the later application of a limitation found in the earlier-issued patent would not constitute an “unobvious modification”
• each patent involved combination/subcombinations, and one of the patents included additional claims combining the two subcombinations

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).