Opinion · Supreme Court of the United States
Laboratory Corp. of America Holdings v. Metabolite Laboratories, Inc.
Laboratory Corp. of Am. Holdings v. Metabolite Laboratories, Inc., 546 U.S. 999 (2005)
- Type
- Opinion
- Court
- Supreme Court of the United States
- Jurisdiction
- Federal
- Date
- 2005-11-02
- Topic
- bankruptcy
How later courts describe this case
- holding that circumstantial evidence was sufficient to show that a method step was carried out by the direct infringer, even in the absence of direct evidence for each direct infringer
- “A preamble may provide context for claim construction, particularly, where as here, that preamble’s statement of intended use forms the basis for distinguishing the prior art in the patent’s prosecution history.”
Citator
UpLaw has not yet analyzed Laboratory Corp. of America Holdings v. Metabolite Laboratories, Inc.. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.
- Authority status
- pending
- Cited by
- 6 opinions
C. A. Fed. Cir. Having been advised by The Chief Justice that he now realizes that he should have recused himself from participation in this case, and does now recuse himself, the Court vacates its order of Monday, October 31, 2005 [ante, p. 975]. The Court has reconsidered, the petition for writ of certiorari, which is granted limited to Question 3 as presented by the petition. The Chief Justice has not participated in the vote to withdraw the order of October 31, 2005, or in the instant reconsideration of the petition for writ of certiorari.