Interconnect Planning Corporation v. Thomas E. Feil, Robert O. Carpenter, v Band Systems, Inc., and Turret Equipment Corp.

How courts have described this case

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

• requiring a “suggestion in the prior art that the components be combined as they were”
• explaining that the PTO’s decision on a patent’s validity “is never binding on the court,” which has an “obligation . . . to reach an independent conclusion” (quoting Fromson v. Advance Offset Plate, Inc., 755 F.2d 1549, 1555 (Fed. Cir. 1985))
• vacating summary judgment of invalidity because the district court “relied on the identical references that had been before the reissue examiners, and ... reached a different conclusion of law”
• “IPC’s view is incorrect that the PTO’s [reissue] decision must be given controlling weight .... ”
• invention must be viewed not with blueprint drawn by inventor, but in light of state of art at time
• “When prior art references require selective combination by the court to render obvious a subsequent invention, there must be some reason for the combination other than the hindsight gleaned from the invention itself”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

138 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

• Loctite Corporation, Appellant/cross-Appellee v. Ultraseal Ltd., Appellees/cross-Appellants
  Federal Circuit· 1985-12-17· cited 365×
• Continental Can Company Usa, Inc. And Continental Pet Technologies, Inc. v. Monsanto Company, Hoover Universal, Inc. And Johnson Controls, Inc.
  Federal Circuit· 1991-12-26· cited 310×
• C.R. Bard, Inc. v. M3 Systems, Inc.
  Federal Circuit· 1998-09-30· cited 294×
• Atd Corporation v. Lydall, Inc., Defendant/cross-Appellant
  Federal Circuit· 1998-10-06· cited 179×
• Brooktree Corporation, Plaintiff/cross-Appellant v. Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.
  Federal Circuit· 1993-01-04· cited 178×
• Uniroyal, Inc. v. Rudkin-Wiley Corporation, Premix, Inc. v. Rudkin-Wiley Corporation
  Federal Circuit· 1988-01-13· cited 176×
• Northern Telecom, Inc. v. Datapoint Corporation, Defendant/cross-Appellant
  Federal Circuit· 1990-08-27· cited 172×
• Orthokinetics, Inc. v. Safety Travel Chairs, Inc.
  Federal Circuit· 1986-12-05· cited 170×
• Custom Accessories, Inc. v. Jeffrey-Allan Industries, Inc.
  Federal Circuit· 1986-12-12· cited 162×
• Symbol Technologies, Inc. v. Opticon, Inc., and Opto Electronics
  Federal Circuit· 1991-09-06· cited 130×
• Fresenius USA, Inc. v. Baxter International, Inc.
  Federal Circuit· 2013-07-02· cited 127×
• Exmark Manufacturing Co. v. Briggs & Stratton Power Products Group, LLC
  Federal Circuit· 2018-01-12· cited 120×
• Ryko Manufacturing Co. v. Nu-Star, Inc.
  Federal Circuit· 1991-12-04· cited 119×
• Sensonics, Inc., Plaintiff/cross-Appellant v. Aerosonic Corp., and Herbert J. Frank
  Federal Circuit· 1996-04-24· cited 98×
• In Re Anita Dembiczak and Benson Zinbarg
  Federal Circuit· 1999-04-28· cited 93×
• In Re Hans Oetiker
  Federal Circuit· 1992-10-13· cited 88×
• Para-Ordnance Manufacturing, Inc. v. Sgs Importers International, Inc., Defendant/cross-Appellant
  Federal Circuit· 1996-03-20· cited 86×
• Polaroid Corporation v. Eastman Kodak Company
  Federal Circuit· 1986-04-25· cited 83×
• Diversitech Corporation v. Century Steps, Inc., Defendant-Cross
  Federal Circuit· 1988-06-27· cited 76×
• In Re the Dow Chemical Co
  Federal Circuit· 1988-01-25· cited 71×

Cites

35 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

• Graham v. John Deere Co. of Kansas City
  Supreme Court· 1966-02-21· cited 3,371×
• American Hoist & Derrick Company, Cross-Appellee v. Sowa & Sons, Inc., Cross-Appellant
  Federal Circuit· 1984-01-12· cited 557×
• Stratoflex, Inc. v. Aeroquip Corporation
  Federal Circuit· 1983-07-25· cited 538×
• South Corporation and Seal Fleet, Inc. v. The United States
  Federal Circuit· 1982-10-28· cited 481×
• Kimball Laundry Co. v. United States
  Supreme Court· 1949-06-27· cited 443×
• W.L. Gore & Associates, Inc., Appellant/cross-Appellee v. Garlock, Inc., Appellee/cross-Appellant
  Federal Circuit· 1983-11-14· cited 366×
• Sakraida v. Ag Pro, Inc.
  Supreme Court· 1976-06-21· cited 282×
• Sowa & Sons, Inc. v. American Hoist & Derrick Co.
  Supreme Court· 1984-10-01· cited 254×
• Lindemann Maschinenfabrik Gmbh v. American Hoist and Derrick Company, Harris Press and Shear Division, Commercial Metals Company
  Federal Circuit· 1984-03-21· cited 229×
• Environmental Designs, Ltd. And the Trentham Corporation v. Union Oil Company of California and Ralph M. Parsons Co.
  Federal Circuit· 1983-07-25· cited 226×
• Acs Hospital Systems, Inc., Appellant/cross-Appellee v. Montefiore Hospital and Wells National Services Corporation, Appellees/cross-Appellants
  Federal Circuit· 1984-04-27· cited 210×
• Raytheon Company, Appellee/cross-Appellant v. Roper Corporation, Appellant/cross-Appellee
  Federal Circuit· 1983-12-30· cited 185×
• Leeds & Catlin Co. v. Victor Talking MacHine Co.
  Supreme Court· 1909-04-19· cited 184×
• Howard A. Fromson, Appellant/cross-Appellee v. Advance Offset Plate, Inc., Appellee/cross-Appellant
  Federal Circuit· 1985-02-21· cited 151×
• Peter Gabor Kalman v. Kimberly-Clark Corporation
  Federal Circuit· 1983-07-19· cited 136×
• Tee-Pak, Inc. v. St. Regis Paper Company
  Sixth Circuit· 1974-02-14· cited 130×
• Robert L. Jones and Labrado, Inc. v. Alex Hardy
  Federal Circuit· 1984-02-08· cited 130×
• Medtronic, Inc., and Med-Rel, Inc. v. Cardiac Pacemakers, Inc.
  Federal Circuit· 1983-11-23· cited 107×
• In Re Frank N. Piasecki and Donald N. Meyers
  Federal Circuit· 1984-10-17· cited 96×
• In Re Howard Sernaker
  Federal Circuit· 1983-02-28· cited 95×