In Re Lucas S. Gordon and Karl M. Sutherland

How courts have described this case

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

• finding that a modification which renders the invention inoperable for its intended purpose is not obvious because it teaches away from the invention
• finding no suggestion to modify a prior art device where the modification would render the device inoperable for its intended purpose
• \The mere fact that the prior art could be so modified would not have made the modification obvious unless the prior art suggested the desirability of the modification.\
• “an improper ‘obvious to try’ consideration”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).