Search Results for: MINING CLAIM

marcus model

Marcus model. Labor law. A method for determining whether a union member’s state-law claim against the employer is preempted by federal law, by focusing on whether the state-law claim can be maintained independently of an interpretation of the collective-bargaining agreement. • In Lingle v. Norge Div. of Magic Chef, Inc., 486 U.S. 399, 108 S.Ct. […]

marcus model Read More »

extra elements test

extra-elements test. Intellectual property. A judicial test for determining whether a state-law claim is preempted by federal intellectual-property statutes under the Sears–Compco doctrine, the criterion being that if the claim requires proof of an extra element that makes the action qualitatively different from an infringement action based on federal law, the state action is not

extra elements test Read More »

apex rule

apex rule. Mining law. The principle that a vein of ore may be mined if it extends beyond the vertical boundaries of the surface claim on which the vein apexes. — Also termed extralateral right. Cf. INTRALIMINAL RIGHT. [Cases: Mines and Minerals 30. C.J.S. Mines and Minerals § 69.]

apex rule Read More »

graham factors

Graham factors. Patents. A three-part test for determining obviousness under § 103 of the Patent Act of 1952, looking at (1) the scope and content of the prior art, (2) the differences between the prior art and the patent claims, and (3) the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. Graham v. John Deere

graham factors Read More »

nonobviousness

nonobviousness. Patents. 1. An invention’s quality of being sufficiently different from the prior art that, at the time the invention was made, it would not have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art relevant to the invention. 2. The requirement that this quality must be demonstrated for an invention to be

nonobviousness Read More »

infringement test

infringement test. Patents. A means of determining whether a patent claim is dependent by asking whether the claim would always be infringed if the independent claim on which it rests were infringed. • Since a dependent claim must incorporate all the elements of the independent claim, an infringement of the independent claim must also be

infringement test Read More »

Scroll to Top