Pamela Kay Humphries v. Robert Brian Buchanan

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that the patent holder “does not dispute that Ramipril [, a use of which is prior art,] is in fact effective at preventing or treating stroke, which is the entire premise of his patent”
• expressing “skeptic[ism]” that the phrase “for the treat- ment or prevention of stroke” in a claim preamble was more than an expression of purpose for the claimed meth- od
• “The inherent result must inevitably re- sult from the disclosed steps . . . .”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).