|  ...courts have not been reluctant to sustain a patent to the man who has taken the final step which has turned a failure into a success. In the law of patents, it is the last step that wins.
 Mr. Justice BrownThe Washburn and Moen Mfg. Co. et al.
 v. The Beat 'Em All Barbed Wire Co. et al.
 "The Barbed Wire Case"
 United States Supreme Court
 143 U.S. 154, 158 (1892)
 | 
                          
                            |  I knew that a country without a patent office and good patent laws was just a crab, and couldn't travel any way but sideways or backways.
 Mark Twain"A Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court"
 | 
                          
                            |  An inventor is a man who looks around upon the world, and is not content with things as they are; he wants to improve whatever he sees; he wants to benefit the world; he is haunted by an idea; the spirit of invention possesses him, seeing materialization.
 Alexander Graham Bell | 
                          
                            |  The object of the patent law is to secure inventors what they have actually invented or discovered, and it ought not to be defeated by a too strict and technical adherence to the letter of the statute or by the application of artificial rules of interpretation.
 Mr. Justice BrownTopliff v. Topliff
 United States Supreme Court
 145 U.S. 156, 171 (1892)
 | 
                          
                            |  The specification and claims of a patent, particularly if the invention be at all complicated, constitute one of the most difficult legal instruments to draw with accuracy.
 Mr. Justice BrownTopliff v. Topliff
 United States Supreme Court
 145 U.S. 156, 171 (1892)
 | 
                          
                            |  The only thing that keeps us alive is our brilliance. The only way to protect our brilliance is our patents.
 Dr. Edwin Land | 
                          
                            |  The life of a patent solicitor has always been a hard one.
 Judge Giles RichIn re Ruschig et al.
 Court of Customs and Patent Appeals
 154 U.S.P.Q. 118, 121 (1967)
 |