Adams v. United States
BERT N. ADAMS, EMMA ADAMS, GEORGE HALLINGBY (INDIVIDUALLY AND AS OF THE ESTATE OF OLAF HALLINGBY, DECEASED), JANE MAESEL, IRIS PETRY, LEWIS M. SCHOTT, MARY ELLEN HALLINGBY SEIMERS, AND HELEN LOUISE SUTCLIFFE (INDIVIDUALLY AND AS OF THE ESTATE OF ERNEST M. SUTCLIFFE, DECEASED) v. United States
Opinion of the Court
Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.
On writ, of certiorari to review the action of the United States Court of Claims in holding that the petitioners’ patent was valid and infringed and that petitioners were entitled to recover compensation for the unlicensed use of their patented invention covering an electric battery, the Supreme Court granted certiorari ( 380 U.S. 949 ) and affirmed on February 21, 1966 ( 383 U.S. 39 ) the decision of the Court of Claims on the issue of validity of the patent, holding that the patent was valid since it satisfied the separate tests of novelty, nonobviousness and utility required for the issuance of a patent.
How later courts describe this case
Explanatory parentheticals written by citing courts — 1 in all; the most informative distinct ones are shown.
-
("It is fundamental that claims are to be construed in the light of the specifications and both are to be read with a view to ascertaining the invention.")
Cited by 1 case
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
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.