From our private database of 46,300+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.
Diamond v. Diehr
United States Supreme Court
450 U.S. 175 (1981)
- Written by Craig Conway, LLM
Facts
Diehr (applicant) filed a patent application that claimed a process for curing rubber. The process included mathematical calculations such as the well known Arrhenius equation. The patent examiner rejected the claims as unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. §101 because they were directed to mathematical formulas, and because the non-mathematical steps were necessary to the process and thus improper bases for patentability. Diehr appealed to the Court of Customs and Patent Appeals, which reversed. Diamond (petitioner), the Commissioner of Patents, filed a writ of certiorari with the United States Supreme Court, which was granted.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Rehnquist, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 805,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
