Stratoflex, Inc. v. Aeroquip Corporation

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that secondary considerations may be the most prohibitive and cogent evidence of non-obviousness
• noting that evidence of these factors must be considered with all the evidence and “not just when the decision-maker remains in doubt after reviewing the art”
• objective evidence “is to be considered as part of all the evidence, not just when the decision-maker remains in doubt after reviewing the art.”
• \evidence of secondary considerations may often be the most probative and cogent evidence in the record\
• “The claims having been found invalid, the issue [of infringement] has been rendered moot.”
• “Because the top and cut-out flap are not ‘distinct layers’ in the accused products— rather, they are part of the same layer—Kellogg does not literally infringe the sealing layer limitation.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).