Sowa & Sons, Inc. v. American Hoist & Derrick Co.

calling the PTO standard “an appropriate starting point for any discussion of materiality” | placing burden on party attacking patent’s validity on grounds of obviousness | upon reissue in light of prior art before the district court, the "burden of proof of unpatentability has become more difficult to sustain” | employee who declines to utilize grievance procedure that meets constitutional standards cannot claim denial of opportunity to rebut charges against him | employee who declines to utilize grievance procedure that meets constitutional standards cannot claim denial of opportunity to rebut charges against him | “We do not read the opinion of the district court as dependent upon the motivation of voters in this referendum for its decision.” | the necessity of showing relevant market to establish a section 2 Sherman Act violation | “the patent system ... is not an ‘exception to’ the antitrust laws" | “patent rights are not legal monopolies in the antitrust sense of that word” | A greater showing of materiality may permit “a lesser showing of facts from which intent can be inferred ... sufficient to justify holding the patent invalid ...” | exclusion of blacks from housing violated Fair Housing Act “regardless [of] whether they do so out of a desire to protect property values and not out of any animus against black people generally” | “examiners ... are assumed to have some expertise in interpreting the references and to be familiar from their work with the level of skill in the art and whose duty it is to issue only valid patents” | grievance procedure, if utilized, could eliminate a constitutional violation | “When no prior art other than that which was considered by the PTO examiner is relied on by the attacker, he has the added burden of overcoming the deference that is due to a qualified government agency presumed to have properly done its job.... ” | grievance procedure, if utilized, could eliminate a constitutional violation