United States v. Adams
| United States v. Adams | |
|---|---|
| Argued October 14, 1965 Decided February 21, 1966 | |
| Full case name | United States v. Bert N. Adams, et al. |
| Citations | 383 U.S. 39 (more) |
| Holding | |
| Wet battery including a combination of known elements not obvious because the operating characteristics were unexpected and improved over then-existing wet batteries. | |
| Court membership | |
| |
| Case opinions | |
| Majority | Clark, joined by Warren, Black, Douglas, Harlan, Brennan, Stewart |
| Dissent | White |
| Fortas took no part in the consideration or decision of the case. | |
United States v. Adams, 383 U.S. 39 (1966), is a United States Supreme Court decision in the area of patent law. This case was later cited in KSR v. Teleflex as an example of a case satisfying the requirement for non-obviousness of a combination of known elements. It also features one of the great stories of patent litigation lore, with Adams's attorney utilizing an innovative and unique method of non-oral advocacy at oral argument in front of the Supreme Court.