Sakraida v. Ag Pro, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• invalidating a patent that “simply arrange[d] old elements with each performing the same function it had been known to perform”
• “[Producing a desired result in a cheaper and faster way, and enjoying commercial success ‘without invention will not make patentability.’ ” (citation omitted
• “[Producing a desired result in a cheaper and faster way, and enjoying commercial success ‘without invention will not make patentability.’ ” (citation omitted); Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co. v. Supermarket Equipment Corp., 340 U.S. 147, 153, 71 S.Ct. 127, 130, 95 L.Ed. 162 (1950
• system of cleaning barns by flooding them with water obvious in light of method Hercules used to clean the Augean Stables
• commercial success due to benefits in terms of convenience and cost are not sufficient grounds for finding a combination patent valid
• “The ultimate test of patent validity is one of law, but resolution of the obviousness issue necessarily entails several basic factual inquiries”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).