The Standard Oil Company, Appellant/cross-Appellee v. American Cyanamid Company, Appellee/cross-Appellant

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that prosecution history limits claim only when patentee clearly takes position before PTO such that competitor would reasonably believe the applicant had surrendered the relevant subject matter
• noting that while board certification- in rheumatology would be ideal, approximately half of the physicians treating rheumatoid arthritis patients at the time did not háve such certification
• holding arguments made to convince the examiner of patentability “limits the interpretation of claims so as to exclude any interpretation that may have been disclaimed or disavowed during prosecution in order to obtain claim allowance”
• holding arguments made to convince the examiner of patentability “limits the interpretation of claims so as to exclude any interpretation that may have been disclaimed or disavowed during prosecution in order to obtain claim allowance”
• noting that “the prosecution history (or file wrapper
• finding the prosecution record of critical significance in determining the meaning and scope of the claims especially when the inventor has made express representations as to reasons for amendments and changes to the device

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).