Compaq Computer v. Procom Technology

Citation: Compaq Computer Corp. v. Procom Technology, Inc., 908 F. Supp. 1409, 37 U.S.P.Q.2d (BNA) 1801 (S.D. Tex. 1995).

The court found that Compaq’s compilation of five “threshold values” used to predict imminent failure of a disk drive meets the ''Feist v. Rural Telephone|Feist]] originality standard since Compaq made numerous subjective choices requiring creativity and judgment in determining which values to monitor; moreover, “the underlying elements of the compilation are not facts” because they were determined by Compaq based on its estimate of when the disk drive would fail and its business judgment as to when it would be willing to replace it under its product warranty.