Fuller v. Yentzer
Supreme Court of the United States
■ Appeal from the Circuit Court of the United States for the Northern District of Illinois.
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Clieeord
Patents for a machine will not be sustained if the claim is for a result, the established rule being that the invention, if any, within the meaning of the Patent Act, consists in the means or apparatus by which the result is obtained, and not merely in the mode of operation, independent of the mechanical devices employed; nor will a patent be held valid for a principle or for an idea, or any other mere abstraction. Burr v. Duryee, 1 Wall. 531.
Where the claim immediately follows the description of the invention, it may be construed in connection with the explanations given in the description;…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Burr v. DuryeeSupreme Court of the United States · 1864
- Gould v. ReesSupreme Court of the United States · 1872
3Cited by66 opinions
- Boyden Power-Brake Co. v. Westinghouse Westinghouse v. Boyden Power-Brake Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1898
- Miller v. Eagle Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1894
- Westinghouse v. Boyden Power Brake Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1898
- National Hollow Brake-Beam Co. v. Interchangeable Brake-Beam Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1901
- Halliburton Oil Well Cementing Co. v. WalkerSupreme Court of the United States · 1946
61 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.