Click the case name for better results:

Mentor Corporation v Hollister Incorporated: ChD 1991

The court considered the meaning of the phrase a ‘person skilled in the art’ in the context of a patent claim.Aldous J said: ‘The section requires the skilled man to be able to perform the invention, but does not lay down the limits as to the time and energy that the skilled man must spend … Continue reading Mentor Corporation v Hollister Incorporated: ChD 1991

Mentor Corporation v Hollister Incorporated: CA 1993

Lloyd LJ added to the guidance at first instance: ‘In each case sufficiency will thus be a question of fact and degree, depending on the nature of the invention and the other circumstances of the case. But if a working definition is required then one cannot do better than that proposed by Buckley L.J. in … Continue reading Mentor Corporation v Hollister Incorporated: CA 1993