TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Diamond v. Bradley

Diamond v. Bradley, 450 U.S. 381 (1981)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Supreme Court of the United States
Decided
March 9, 1981
Docket
No. 79-855
Judges
Per Curiam
Citations
450 U.S. 381101 S. Ct. 149567 L. Ed. 2d 31149 U.S.L.W. 4250209 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 971981 U.S. LEXIS 80
Cited by 6

Opinion — Per Curiam

450 U.S. 381 (1981)

DIAMOND, COMMISSIONER OF PATENTS AND TRADEMARKS

v.

BRADLEY ET AL.

No. 79-855.

Supreme Court of United States.

Argued October 14, 1980. Decided March 9, 1981. CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF CUSTOMS AND PATENT APPEALS.

Deputy Solicitor General Wallace argued the cause for petitioner. With him on the briefs were Solicitor General McCree, Assistant Attorney General Litvack, Harriet S. Shapiro, Robert B. Nicholson, Frederic Freilicher, Joseph F. Nakamura, and Thomas E. Lynch.

Nicholas Prasinos argued the cause for respondents. With him on the briefs were Faith F. Driscoll, Henry L. Hanson, and Ronald T. Reiling. [*]

PER CURIAM.

The judgment is affirmed by an equally divided Court.

THE CHIEF JUSTICE took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.

NOTES

[*] Edward S. Irons, Mary Helen Sears, and Robert P. Beshar filed a brief for National Semiconductor Corp. as amicus curiae urging reversal.

Briefs of amici curiae urging affirmance were filed by Donald R. Dunner, Kenneth E. Kuffner, and Travis Gordon White for the American Patent Law Association, Inc.; by Reed C. Lawlor and James W. Geriak for the Los Angeles Patent Association; and by Morton C. Jacobs for Applied Data Research, Inc., et al.

William James Beard and John F. Tregoning filed a brief for Halliburton Services as amicus curiae.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

Cited by 6 cases

View all citing references →
1982: 31992: 11994: 219822026peak 1982 · 3

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Arrhythmia Research Technology, Inc. v. Corazonix Corporation958 F.2d 1053 (Fed. Cir. 1992)
  2. Apple Computer, Inc. v. Franklin Computer Corp.545 F. Supp. 812 (E.D. Pa. 1982)
  3. In re Karen I. Trovato and Leendert Dorst42 F.3d 1376 (Fed. Cir. 1994)
  4. In re Abele684 F.2d 902 (C.C.P.A. 1982)
  5. In re Thomas P.H. Warmerdam and Bernard J.H. Verwer33 F.3d 1354 (Fed. Cir. 1994)
  6. In re Pardo684 F.2d 912 (C.C.P.A. 1982)

Most recent

  1. In re Karen I. Trovato and Leendert Dorst42 F.3d 1376 (Fed. Cir. 1994)
  2. In re Thomas P.H. Warmerdam and Bernard J.H. Verwer33 F.3d 1354 (Fed. Cir. 1994)
  3. Arrhythmia Research Technology, Inc. v. Corazonix Corporation958 F.2d 1053 (Fed. Cir. 1992)
  4. In re Abele684 F.2d 902 (C.C.P.A. 1982)
  5. In re Pardo684 F.2d 912 (C.C.P.A. 1982)
  6. Apple Computer, Inc. v. Franklin Computer Corp.545 F. Supp. 812 (E.D. Pa. 1982)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list