United States Gypsum Company v. National Gypsum Company

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that intent is not required for a best mode violation and noting that the discussion of intent in Brooktree was dicta
• finding a best mode violation for concealing the preferred expanded perlite for making the claimed joint compound com prising, inter alia, expanded perlite
• best mode violation where inventor failed to disclose “best” material for use in invention that “significantly improved the physical properties of the joint compound,” rather than “matter of commercial expediency”
• “Disclosure concerning the best mode of practicing an invention must be distinguished for best mode purposes from disclosure for optimum commercial production. The former is required; the latter is not.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).