Confirm favorite deletion?
Patent Law Keyed to Adelman
Ormco Corp v. Align Technology, Inc
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. Review the Facts of this case here:
Plaintiff holds the '611 patent which includes claims related to orthodontic devices other than braces for straightening teeth. Claim 1 is an apparatus claim that describes a series of three retainer-like devices with different "geometries" that are given to the patient in one package including instructions on how to use. The patient is to use the first device to move the teeth to an intermediate stage, the second device to move the teeth to a successive stage, and the third device to move the teeth to the last stage. The patient has the option, but is not required, to see the orthodontist or dentist for various progress appointments. Defendant developed the "Red, White & Blue" orthodontic product, which Plaintiff claimed was an infringement on its patent '611. Plaintiff sued Defendant for patent infringement and Defendant argued that due to obviousness because of prior art references, the patent '611 claims were invalid. The district court granted summary judgment to Plaintiff, and held the patent claims were valid. The district court also found Defendant liable for infringement. Defendant appealed.
- 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.