In re Papesch
United States Court of Customs and Patent Appeals
315 F.2d 381, 137 USPQ 43 (1963)
- Written by Craig Conway, LLM
Facts
Papesch (applicant) filed a patent application claiming a series of chemical compounds that were admittedly obvious in light of the prior art as to their structure. However, in the text of the specification, Papesch presented evidence of unexpected results from these compounds, and further provided an affidavit supporting the same from a researcher. The examiner rejected the claims nonetheless and suggested that Papesch file claims directed to using the compound for the unexpected medical purpose rather than pursuing claims for their chemical structure. Papesch sought review from the Board of Patent Appeals, which affirmed that the compounds were obvious and disregarded the affidavit evidence of unexpected results. Papesch appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Rich, A.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.