· 2/18/1997
Federal Case
Citations
- 106 F.3d 976
- 41 U.S.P.Q. 2d (BNA) 1782
- 1997 U.S. App. LEXIS 2794
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- finding no eo-inventorship where district court did not clearly err in finding that the alleged co-inventor was, inter alia, “doing nothing more than explaining to the inventors what the then state of the art was” and “telling them what was available in the marketplace by way of product”
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.