# List of patent case law

This list contains an alphabetical listing of historically significant or leading case law in the area of patent law. For a list of patent law cases in just the United States, see United States patent law cases.
* Top
* 0–9
* A
* B
* C
* D
* E
* F
* G
* H
* I
* J
* K
* L
* M
* N
* O
* P
* Q
* R
* S
* T
* U
* V
* W
* X
* Y
* Z

## A

* Aerotel v Telco and Macrossan's Application (UK, 2006)
* Anderson’s-Black Rock, Inc. v. Pavement Salvage Co. (US, 1969)
* Apple Inc. litigation (multiple, multinational cases)
* Apple v. HTC (US, 2010)
* Apple Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. (multiple, multinational cases, ongoing)
* Ariad v. Lilly (US, 2006)
* Arizona Cartridge Remanufacturers Association Inc. v. Lexmark International Inc. (US, 2005)
* Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics (US, 2013)
* Atomic Energy Generation Device Case (JP, 1969) - relates to the concept of "incomplete invention"
* Auction Method/Hitachi (EPO, 2004)

## B

* Bilski v. Kappos (US, )
* Bowman v. Monsanto (US, 2012)
* Bauer & Cie. v. O'Donnell (US, 1913)

## C

* Catnic Components Ltd. v. Hill & Smith Ltd. (UK, 1982)
* City of Elizabeth v. American Nicholson Pavement Co. (US, 1878)
* Continental Paper Bag Co. v. Eastern Paper Bag Co. (US, 1908)
* Creative Technology v. Apple (US and international, 2006)

## D

* Diamond v. Chakrabarty (US, 1980)
* Diamond v. Diehr (US, 1981)

## E

* EBay Inc. v. MercExchange, L.L.C. (US, 2006)
* Egbert v. Lippmann (US, 1881)
* Egyptian Goddess v. Swisa (US, 2008)
* Ex Parte Bowman (US, 2001)
* Ex Parte Lundgren (US, 2004)
* Ex Parte Quayle (US, 1935)

## F

* Festo Corp. v. Shoketsu Kinzoku Kogyo Kabushiki Co. (US, 2002)
* Free World Trust v. Électro Santé Inc. (CA, 2000)

## G

* Gottschalk v. Benson (US, 1972)
* Graham v. John Deere Co. (US, 1966)
* Graver Tank & Manufacturing Co. v. Linde Air Products Co. (US, 1950)

## H

* Harvard College v. Canada (Commissioner of Patents): patent of higher lifeforms (CA, 2002)
* Honeywell v. Sperry Rand (US, 1973)
* Hotchkiss v. Greenwood (US, 1850)
* Huawei Technologies Co. Ltd v ZTE Corp. and ZTE Deutschland GmbH (European Court of Justice, C-170/13, 2015), judgement on standard-essential patents

## I

* Illinois Tool Works Inc. v. Independent Ink, Inc. (US, 2006)
* Improver v Remington (UK, 1990)
* In re Bilski (US, 2008)
* In re Seagate Technology (US, 2007)

## K

* Kirin-Amgen v Hoechst Marion Roussel (UK, 2004)
* Kodak v. Apple (US, 2010, ongoing)
* KSR v. Teleflex (US, 2007)

## L

* Lear, Inc. v. Adkins (US, 1969)

## M

* Markman v. Westview Instruments, Inc. (US, 1996)
* Mayo v. Prometheus (US, 2011)
* MedImmune, Inc. v. Genentech, Inc. (US, 2007)
* Menashe v. William Hill (UK, 2002)
* Merck v. Integra (US, 2005)
* Monsanto Canada Inc. v. Schmeiser (CA, 2004)
* Motorola Mobility v. Apple Inc. (US, 2010)

## N

* Nokia v. Apple (US & international, 2009)

## O

* Orange-Book-Standard (DE, 2009), on the interaction between patent law and standards

## P

* Parker v. Flook (US, 1978)
* Pension Benefit Systems Partnership (EPO, 2000)
* Pfaff v. Wells Electronics, Inc. (US, 1998)

## Q

* Quanta v. LG Electronics (US, 2008)

## S

* State Street Bank v. Signature Financial Group (US, 1998)

## T

* Typhoon Touch v. Dell (US, 2008)

## U

* United States v. Adams (US, 1966)

## W

* Warner-Jenkinson Company, Inc. v. Hilton Davis Chemical Co. (US, 1997)