Dennison Manufacturing Co. v. Panduit Corp.

How later courts describe this case

• "Like all legal conclusions, that under § 103 rests on a factual evidentiary foundation.”
• "Like all legal conclusions, that under Sec. 103 rests on a factual evidentiary foundation."
• a prior art reference “must be considered in its entirety, i.e., as a whole, including portions that would lead away from the invention in suit”
• “Though technology has burgeoned, the patent system is not limited to sophisticated technologies ... difficult for judges to understand and foreclosed to those who make less mysterious inventions a judge can understand”
• "Before answering Graham's ‘content’ inquiry, it must be known whether a patent or publication is in the prior art under 35 U.S.C. § 102.”
• it is error to “focus on isolated minutiae in a prior art patent while disregarding its scope, i.e., its entire disclosure, and how its disclosed structure works”
• delay of a year or more gives prima facie merit to speedy trial claim
• “ ‘In appraising an inventor’s contribution to the art ... the most reliable test is to look at the situation before and after it appears’ ”