Question: Which court case occurred first, Griswold v. Connecticut, or Diamond v. Chakrabarty?

full_context: Document 1: Griswold v. Connecticut: Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U.S. 479 (1965) , is a landmark case in the United States in which the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that the Constitution, through the Bill of Rights, implies a fundamental right to privacy. The case involved a Connecticut "Comstock law" that prohibited any person from using "any drug, medicinal article or instrument for the purpose of preventing conception." By a vote of 7–2, the Supreme Court invalidated the law on the grounds that it violated the "right to marital privacy", establishing the basis for the right to privacy with respect to intimate practices. This and other cases view the right to privacy as a right to "protect[ion] from governmental intrusion."
Document 2: Diamond v. Chakrabarty: Diamond v. Chakrabarty, 447 U.S. 303 (1980), was a United States Supreme Court case dealing with whether genetically modified organisms can be patented.
Document 3: United States v. Guest: United States v. Guest 383 U.S. 745 (1966) is a United States Supreme Court opinion, authored by Justice Potter Stewart, in which the court extended the protection of the 14th Amendment to citizens who suffer rights deprivations at the hands of private conspiracies, where there is minimal state participation in the conspiracy. The Court also held that there is Constitutional right to travel from state to state.
Document 4: Genetically modified organism: A genetically modified organism (GMO) is any organism whose genetic material has been altered using genetic engineering techniques (i.e., a genetically "engineered" organism). GMOs are used to produce many medications and genetically modified foods and are widely used in scientific research and the production of other goods. The term GMO is very close to the technical legal term, 'living modified organism', defined in the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety, which regulates international trade in living GMOs (specifically, "any living organism that possesses a novel combination of genetic material obtained through the use of modern biotechnology").
Document 5: Roe v. Wade: Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973) , is a landmark decision by the United States Supreme Court on the issue of abortion. It was decided simultaneously with a companion case, "Doe v. Bolton". The Court ruled 7–2 that a right to privacy under the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment extended to a woman's decision to have an abortion, but that this right must be balanced against the state's interests in regulating abortions: protecting women's health and protecting the potentiality of human life. Arguing that these state interests became stronger over the course of a pregnancy, the Court resolved this balancing test by tying state regulation of abortion to the third trimester of pregnancy.
Document 6: Ananda Mohan Chakrabarty: Ananda Mohan Chakrabarty (Bengali: আনন্দমোহন চক্রবর্তী "Ānandamōhan Cakrabartī"), Ph.D. is an Bengali American microbiologist, scientist, and researcher, most notable for his work in directed evolution and his role in developing a genetically engineered organism using plasmid transfer while working at GE, the patent for which led to landmark Supreme Court case, "Diamond v. Chakrabarty".
Document 7: Penumbra (law): In United States constitutional law, the penumbra includes a group of rights derived, by implication, from other rights explicitly protected in the Bill of Rights. These rights have been identified through a process of "reasoning-by-interpolation", where specific principles are recognized from "general idea[s]" that are explicitly expressed in other constitutional provisions. Although researchers have traced the origin of the term to the nineteenth century, the term first gained significant popular attention in 1965, when Justice William O. Douglas's majority opinion in "Griswold v. Connecticut" identified a right to privacy in the penumbra of the constitution.
Document 8: Standard Sanitary Mfg. Co. v. United States: Standard Sanitary Mfg. Co. v. United States], also known as the "Bathtub Trust" case, 226 U.S. 20 (1912), was a United States Supreme Court decision in which the Court held unanimously that ownership of patent rights does not immunize the owner from the antitrust laws prohibiting combinations in unreasonable restraint of trade. The Court famously said that the Sherman Act "is its own measure of right and wrong, of what it permits or forbids, and the judgment of the courts cannot be set up against it in a supposed accommodation of its policy with the good intention of parties, and, it may be, of some good results." A 1917 commentary said, "This decision has become the leading case on the subject of the relation of the patent law and Sherman law to each other."
Document 9: Estelle Griswold: Estelle Naomi Trebert Griswold (June 8, 1900 – August 13, 1981) was a civil rights activist and feminist most commonly known as a defendant in what became the Supreme Court case "Griswold v. Connecticut", in which contraception for married couples was legalized in the state of Connecticut, setting the precedent of the right to privacy. Griswold served as the Executive Director of Planned Parenthood in New Haven when she and Yale professor C. Lee Buxton opened a birth control clinic in New Haven in an attempt to change the Connecticut law banning contraception. Their actions set into motion legislation that resulted in both "Poe v. Ullman" and "Griswold v. Connecticut."
Document 10: Diamond v. Charles: Diamond v. Charles, 476 U.S. 54 (1986) , was a United States Supreme Court case that determined that citizens do not have Article III standing to challenge the constitutionality of a state statute in federal court unless they possess a "direct stake" in the outcome.
Document 11: Timeline of United States inventions (after 1991): In 1641, the first patent in North America was issued to Samuel Winslow by the General Court of Massachusetts for a new method of making salt. On April 10, 1790, President George Washington signed the Patent Act of 1790 (1 Stat. 109) into law which proclaimed that patents were to be authorized for "any useful art, manufacture, engine, machine, or device, or any improvement therein not before known or used." On July 31, 1790, Samuel Hopkins of Pittsford, Vermont became the first person in the United States to file and to be granted a patent for an improved method of "Making Pot and Pearl Ashes." The Patent Act of 1836 (Ch. 357, 5 Stat. 117) further clarified United States patent law to the extent of establishing a patent office where patent applications are filed, processed, and granted, contingent upon the language and scope of the claimant's invention, for a patent term of 14 years with an extension of up to an additional 7 years. However, the Uruguay Round Agreements Act of 1994 (URAA) changed the patent term in the United States to a total of 20 years, effective for patent applications filed on or after June 8, 1995, thus bringing United States patent law further into conformity with international patent law. The modern-day provisions of the law applied to inventions are laid out in Title 35 of the United States Code (Ch. 950, sec. 1, 66 Stat. 792).
Document 12: G 2/06: G 2/06 is a decision by the Enlarged Board of Appeal of the European Patent Office (EPO), which issued on 25 November 2008. In its answer to question 2, the Enlarged Board of Appeal ruled that "Rule 28(c) EPC (formerly [Rule 23d(c) [[European Patent Convention|EPC 1973]] ]) forbids the patenting of claims directed to products which – as described in the application – at the filing date could be prepared exclusively by a method which necessarily involved the destruction of the human embryos from which the said products are derived, even if the said method is not part of the claims." In short, a patent under the [[European Patent Convention]] (EPC) cannot be granted for an invention which necessarily involves the use and destruction of [[human embryo]]s. The decision notably refers to the provisions of [[EU Directive 98/44/EC of 6 July 1998 on the legal protection of biotechnological inventions]], referred to in Rule 26(1) [[European Patent Convention|EPC]] .
Document 13: Planned Parenthood v. Casey: Planned Parenthood v. Casey, 505 U.S. 833 (1992) , was a landmark United States Supreme Court case in which the constitutionality of several Pennsylvania state statutory provisions regarding abortion was challenged. The Court's plurality opinion reaffirmed the central holding of "Roe v. Wade" stating that "matters, involving the most intimate and personal choices a person may make in a lifetime, choices central to personal dignity and autonomy, are central to the liberty protected by the Fourteenth Amendment." The Court's plurality opinion upheld the constitutional right to have an abortion while altering the standard for analyzing restrictions on that right, crafting the "undue burden" standard for abortion restrictions. "Planned Parenthood v. Casey" differs from "Roe," however, because under "Roe" the state could not regulate abortions in the first trimester whereas under "Planned Parenthood v. Casey" the state can regulate abortions in the first trimester, or any point before the point of viability, and beyond as long as that regulation does not pose an undue burden on women's fundamental right to an abortion. Applying this new standard of review, the Court upheld four regulations and invalidated the requirement of spousal notification.
Document 14: Obergefell v. Hodges: Obergefell v. Hodges, 576 U.S. ___ (2015) ( ), is a landmark civil rights case in which the United States Supreme Court ruled that the fundamental right to marry is guaranteed to same-sex couples by both the Due Process Clause and the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution in a 5–4 decision.
Document 15: Catherine Roraback: Catherine Gertrude "Katie" Roraback (September 17, 1920 – October 17, 2007) was a civil rights attorney in Connecticut, best known for representing Estelle Griswold and Dr. C. Lee Buxton in the famous 1965 Supreme Court case, " Griswold v. Connecticut", which legalized the use of birth control in Connecticut and created the precedent of the right to privacy. She is also known for such cases as the New Haven Black Panther trials of 1971, in which she defended Black Panther member Ericka Huggins after she was accused of murder. Roraback dealt with issues such as women's rights and racial discrimination, and lived her life to defend the rights of the "dissenters and the dispossessed".
ground_truth: Griswold v. Connecticut