Confirm favorite deletion?
Patent Law Keyed to Adelman
USM Corp. v. SPS Technologies, 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:
Defendant manufactured industrial fasteners and owned a patent on a patch-type self-locking industrial fastener. Plaintiff sold a similar product. As part of a settlement of a prior case, Defendant granted Plaintiff a license allowing Plaintiff to continue using the patent, but required Plaintiff to pay royalties to Defendant. The agreement required Plaintiff to pay Defendant 25% of royalties it received from sublicensing the patent. However, if Plaintiff were to sublicense to any one of four companies that Defendant had previously licensed directly, Plaintiff had to pay 75% of the royalties received. In 1974, three years after the settlement, Plaintiff filed suit in an effort to invalidate Defendant's patent and get back the royalties paid. On summary judgment the district court dismissed the charge of patent misuse. Plaintiff 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.