United States Supreme Court
383 U.S. 1 (1966)
Graham (plaintiff) sued John Deere (defendant) for infringement of a patent claiming a portion of a farm plow. The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals held the patent valid in 1955, but the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals held the patent invalid in 1964, leading to this appeal. Further, Calmar, Inc. v. Cook Chemical Co. and Colgate-Palmolive Co. v. Cook Chemical Co. were recently decided by the Eight Circuit Court of Appeals, each case also involving claims of patent invalidity, and these cases were consolidated with Graham before the Supreme Court. In light of the recently-passed Patent Act of 1952, the Supreme Court was tasked with addressing statutory obviousness for the first time. Prior to this case, the doctrine of obviousness was court-made, and Congress enacted 35 U.S.C. §103 in 1952 to codify the doctrine as statute.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Clark, J.)
What to do next…
Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.
You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.
Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.
Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.
Here's why 204,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,000 briefs, keyed to 188 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.