Casey IRACs are produced by an AI that analyzes the opinion’s content to construct its analysis. While we strive for accuracy, the output may not be flawless. For a complete and precise understanding, please refer to the linked opinions above.

Keywords

statutepatentrespondent

Related Cases

Diamond v. Chakrabarty, 447 U.S. 303, 100 S.Ct. 2204, 65 L.Ed.2d 144, 206 U.S.P.Q. 193

Facts

Respondent filed a patent application relating to his invention of a human-made, genetically engineered bacterium capable of breaking down crude oil, a property which is possessed by no naturally occurring bacteria.

Issue

Rule

Analysis

In choosing such expansive terms as 'manufacture' and 'composition of matter,' modified by the comprehensive 'any,' Congress contemplated that the patent laws should be given wide scope, and the relevant legislative history also supports a broad construction.

Conclusion

Who won?

Chakrabarty's micro-organism constitutes a 'manufacture' or 'composition of matter' within that statute.

You must be

Log In to Casey

Sign Up to Casey

Reset Your Password

Keywords

Related Cases

City of Chicago v. Environmental Defense Fund, 504 U.S. 906, 112 S.Ct. 1932 (Mem), 118 L.Ed.2d 539, 60 USLW 3779

Tull v. United States, 476 U.S. 1139, 106 S.Ct. 2244 (Mem), 90 L.Ed.2d 691

Susquehanna Fertilizer Co. v. Malone, 73 Md. 268, 20 A. 900, 9 L.R.A. 737, 25 Am.St.Rep. 595

Cooper Technologies Co. v. Dudas, 536 F.3d 1330, 87 U.S.P.Q.2d 1705

Hoffmann-La Roche Inc. v. Apotex Inc., 748 F.3d 1326, 110 U.S.P.Q.2d 1494