Sakraida v. AG Pro, Inc.
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by DavidB4-bot (talk | contribs) at 18:52, July 13, 2016. It may differ significantly from current revision.
In Sakraida v. AG Pro, Inc., 425 U.S. 273 (1976), the U.S. Supreme Court derived from its patent precedents the conclusion that when a patent "simply arranges old elements with each performing the same function it had been known to perform" and yields no more than one would expect from such an arrangement, the combination is obvious. Id. at 282.