Diamond v. Diehr
450 U.S. 175 · Decided March 3, 1981 · Supreme Court of the United States
Record summary. This page is generated from the Supreme Court Database’s coded data about the case. It describes who decided what, not the Court’s reasoning. Read the opinion itself before relying on it. Not legal advice.
At a glance
Diamond v. Diehr was decided on March 3, 1981 by a vote of 5–4. The Court affirmed the lower court's decision. Justice William H. Rehnquist wrote the opinion of the Court. SCDB classifies its main issue as “Patentability of computer processes” in the Economic Activity area.
Read the opinion
Case details
- Citations
- 450 U.S. 175 · 101 S. Ct. 1048 · 67 L. Ed. 2d 155 · 1981 U.S. LEXIS 73
- Docket number
- 79-1112
- Decided
- March 3, 1981
- Argued
- October 14, 1980
- Court era
- Burger Court
- Decision type
- Opinion of the Court (orally argued)
- Disposition
- Affirmed
- Outcome for petitioner
- The petitioning party did not receive a favorable disposition
- Vote
- 5–4
- Majority opinion
- William H. Rehnquist
- Opinion assigned by
- Warren E. Burger
- How the case arrived
- Certiorari
- Issue (SCDB)
- Patentability of computer processes
- Issue area
- Economic Activity
- Legal provision
- 35 U.S.C. § 101
- Type of law
- Infrequently litigated statute
- Decision direction (SCDB)
- Conservative what this means
How the Justices voted
| Justice | Vote | Separate writing |
|---|---|---|
| Justice William J. Brennan Jr. | Dissent | |
| Justice Potter Stewart | Majority | |
| Justice Byron R. White | Majority | |
| Justice Thurgood Marshall | Dissent | |
| Chief Justice Warren E. Burger | Majority | |
| Justice Harry A. Blackmun | Dissent | |
| Justice Lewis F. Powell Jr. | Majority | |
| Justice William H. Rehnquist | Majority | Wrote an opinion |
| Justice John Paul Stevens | Dissent | Wrote an opinion |
Full case caption
Diamond, Commissioner of Patents and Trademarks v. Diehr et al.
SCDB identifiers: case 1980-047, docket 1980-047-01.
Related decisions
Other cases on “Patentability of computer processes”
- Diamond v. Bradley
- Parker v. Flook
- Dann v. Johnston
- Gottschalk v. Benson
- Ebay Inc. v. Mercexchange, L. L. C.
- Microsoft Corporation v. AT&T Corp.
Cases on the same legal provision: 35 U.S.C. § 101
- Diamond v. Chakrabarty
- Kewanee Oil Co. v. Bicron Corp.
- Brenner v. Manson
- J. E. M. Ag Supply, Inc. v. Pioneer Hi-Bred International, Inc.
Same Term, same area (Economic Activity)
- Environmental Protection Agency v. National Crushed Stone Association
- Potomac Electric Power Co. v. Director
- Minnesota v. Clover Leaf Creamery Co.
- Board of Governors of Federal Reserve System v. Investment Company Institute
- Steadman v. Securities and Exchange Commission
- Diamond v. Bradley
Source: Supreme Court Database, 2026 Release 01 (data file dated September 8, 2026). Imported into CaseTrail November 5, 2026. Coverage: decisions from the 1946 through 2025 Terms. Methodology · Report an error