Great A. & P. Tea Co. v. Supermarket Equipment Corp.
United States Supreme Court
340 U.S. 147, 71 S. Ct. 127, 95 L. Ed. 162, 1950 U.S. LEXIS 2604, 87 U.S.P.Q. 303 (1950)
Facts
Supermarket (plaintiff) was the assignee of a patent claiming a simple device that separated the grocery orders of distinct customers, a device that became widely used in the field, and Supermarket sued Great A. & P. (defendant) for infringement on that patent. At both the district court and the court of appeals, the validity of the patent claims was upheld, and the United States Supreme Court was tasked with determining if the claimed invention rose to the standard of a patentable invention. The district court held that, although each component of the device was already known, the invention as a whole was new and useful. The court of appeals, relying on the clearly erroneous standard, agreed and looked to the commercial success and long felt need of such a device. Great A&P appealed to the Supreme Court.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Jackson, J.)
Concurrence (Douglas, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 708,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 44,500 briefs, keyed to 983 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.
