Mitsubishi Electric Corporation v. Ampex Corporation

How courts have described this case

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

• holding a patent invalid because the claims were obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103
• party forfeited post-trial challenge on the ground that a special verdict should have been obtained, by proposing and accepting a verdict form that did not separate the potential grounds of invalidity

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).