【判例】103 的研究

【判例】CASE2004: 103: RUIZ v. A.B. CHANCE COMPANY 文字摘錄

PMAP: CASE2004: 103: RUIZ v. A.B. CHANCE COMPANY: "103: RUIZ v. A.B. CHANCE COMPANY"
抹紅版

As noted earlier, this court has repeatedly stated that the motivation to combine the teachings in the prior art may "come from the nature of a problem to be solved, leading inventors to look to references relating to possible solutions to that problem."

難句分析
In addition, the district court in this case did not simply “discount all contrary evidence and bolster a meager amount of evidence to reach a preformed conclusion”.

In short, the record in this case does not approach the evidence necessary to leave this court with a firm conviction that the district court committed clear error in its factual finding of a motivation to combine the Fuller-Rupiper and Gregory teachings.