date:Jun 27, 2012
dy written by Dr M.A Parrish.
Appeal court upholds earlier ruling
Wrigley appealed the federal courts decision arguing that its W-23/menthol combo could not have been anticipated from Procter Gambles earlier patent as a person of ordinary skill could not have derived the combination from it, particularly as the earlier patent did not mention menthol and W-23 being used together.
It also contended that the W-23/menthol combo was not obvious based upon Warner-Lamberts patent and Parrishs study