Legal Opinion
Arrhythmia Research Technology, Inc. v. Corazonix Corporation
Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
Decided May 5, 1992No. 91-1091PublishedCited by 37 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
PAULINE NEWMAN, Circuit Judge.
Arrhythmia Research Technology, Inc. appeals the grant of summary judgment by the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas1 declaring United States Patent No. 4,422,459 to Michael B. Simson (the '459 or Simson patent) invalid for failure to claim statutory subject matter under 35 U.S.C. § 101. The court did not decide the question of infringement.
We conclude that the claimed subject matter is statutory in terms of section 101. The judgment of invalidity on this ground is reversed.
The Simson Invention
The invention claimed in the '459 patent…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- Diamond v. DiehrSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
- Gottschalk v. BensonSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Diamond v. ChakrabartySupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- W.L. Gore & Associates, Inc., Appellant/cross-Appellee v. Garlock, Inc., Appellee/cross-AppellantCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1983
- Parker v. FlookSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by37 opinions
- In Re BilskiCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2008
- In Re Donaldson Company, IncCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1994
- Mortgage Grader, Inc. v. First Choice Loan Services Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2016
- In Re Kuriappan P. Alappat, Edward E. Averill and James G. LarsenCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1994
- State Street Bank & Trust Co. v. Signature Financial Group, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1998
32 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.