Confirm favorite deletion?
Intellectual Property Keyed to Merges
Griffith v. Kanamaru
Facts
Griffith (Plaintiff), a Cornell University professor, applied for a patent on an aminocarnitine compound useful in the treatment of diabetes. He established conception of the invention by June 30, 1981, and a reduction to practice on January 11, 1984. Defendant filed for a U.S. patent on the same compound on November 17, 1982. The Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences decided that Plaintiff had failed to establish a prima facie case that he was entitled to an award of priority against the filing date of Defendant for a patent. Plaintiff claimed that the delay in reduction to practice was justified because he had to secure outside funding for the project as required by Cornell and he was waiting for a particular graduate student to matriculate so she could assist with the project. The Board concluded that Plaintiff’s explanation for his inactivity failed to provide a reason that legally met the “reasonable diligence” requirement of 35 U.S.C. § 102(g). Griffith (Plaintiff) appealed on the issue of reasonable diligence.
Only StudyBuddy Pro offers the complete Case Brief Anatomy*
Access the most important case brief elements for optimal case understanding.
*Case Brief Anatomy includes: Brief Prologue, Complete Case Brief, Brief Epilogue
- The Brief Prologue provides necessary case brief introductory information and includes:
Topic:
Identifies the topic of law and where this case fits within your course outline.Parties:
Identifies the cast of characters involved in the case.Procedural Posture & History:
Shares the case history with how lower courts have ruled on the matter.Case Key Terms, Acts, Doctrines, etc.:
A case specific Legal Term Dictionary.Case Doctrines, Acts, Statutes, Amendments and Treatises:
Identifies and Defines Legal Authority used in this case.
- The Case Brief is the complete case summarized and authored in the traditional Law School I.R.A.C. format. The Pro case brief includes:
Brief Facts:
A Synopsis of the Facts of the case.Rule of Law:
Identifies the Legal Principle the Court used in deciding the case.Facts:
What are the factual circumstances that gave rise to the civil or criminal case? What is the relationship of the Parties that are involved in the case.Issue(s):
Lists the Questions of Law that are raised by the Facts of the case.Holding:
Shares the Court's answer to the legal questions raised in the issue.Concurring / Dissenting Opinions:
Includes valuable concurring or dissenting opinions and their key points.Reasoning and Analysis:
Identifies the chain of argument(s) which led the judges to rule as they did.
- The Brief Prologue closes the case brief with important forward-looking discussion and includes:
Policy:
Identifies the Policy if any that has been established by the case.Court Direction:
Shares where the Court went from here for this case.