Hess v. Dreyfuss’s Empirical Analysis
104 F.2d 801 · 1939
Citation profile
1 federal appellate ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 11 later decisions — most recently November 1967
1 federal appellate ·
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Relies on Robins v. Wettlaufer · Hendrickson & Nelson v. Ronning & Ronning · Brydle v. Honigbaum · Derby v. Whitworth · Methudy v. Roy
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“of conception in the United States, assuming Laurila to be the inventor, proceeds as follows: (1) Laurila, as the junior party to this interference, had the burden of proving priority of invention by a preponderance of the evidence; (2) in Laurila's case this involves proving that the knowledge of his conceived invention must either have been brought to the United States or communicated to someone in the United States prior to April 15, 1954; (3) communication of the conception to someone in the United States may amount to corroboration if: 23”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Mortsell v. Laurila
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.