Landmark cases
Each case page lays out the holding, the procedural posture and facts compressed to what matters, the court's reasoning, the framework the case produced, and how the Federal Circuit and district courts have applied or limited it. The nine decisions below are the load-bearing precedents of modern U.S. patent litigation.
Markman v. Westview Instruments
Claim construction is a question of law for the court, not the jury. The decision that gave its name to every claim-construction hearing since.
Phillips v. AWH Corp.
The Federal Circuit's controlling framework for reading patent claims: intrinsic evidence first, with the specification the single best guide. Rejected dictionary primacy from Texas Digital.
Graham v. John Deere Co.
The Supreme Court's first full reading of § 103. Set out the Graham factors — prior art, differences, level of skill, and secondary considerations — that still structure every obviousness analysis.
KSR International v. Teleflex
Reset the obviousness inquiry under § 103, rejecting the rigid teaching-suggestion-motivation test in favor of a flexible, common-sense approach grounded in the Graham factors.
eBay v. MercExchange
Ended the categorical rule that injunctions follow infringement. A patentee must satisfy the traditional four-factor equitable test like any other litigant.
Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank
The two-step framework for § 101 eligibility — abstract idea, then inventive concept — that has reshaped, and unsettled, software and business-method patent law.
TC Heartland v. Kraft Foods
Re-narrowed patent venue under § 1400(b). For domestic corporations, "resides" means the state of incorporation only, returning to Fourco Glass.
Octane Fitness v. ICON Health & Fitness
Loosened the standard for fees under § 285. An "exceptional" case is one that stands out from others on the totality of circumstances; preponderance of evidence.
Halo Electronics v. Pulse Electronics
Replaced the rigid Seagate framework for enhanced damages with a discretionary, totality inquiry focused on the infringer's subjective conduct.
For the full line of Supreme Court decisions on patent eligibility — from Benson and Diehr to Mayo, Myriad, and Alice — see Supreme Court § 101 cases.