Shepard v. Carrigan’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

149 federal appellate · 64 district · 7 state decisions

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 465 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““Where an applicant for a patent to cover a new combination is compelled by the rejection of his application by the patent-office to narrow his claim by the introduction of a new element, he cannot after the issue of the patent broaden his claim by dropping the element which he was compelled to include in order to secure his patent.””

   9 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. In re Byers · In re Wesseler

2. “This fact [cloth without fluting was old in the art] and the file-wrapper and contents of which we have stated the substance make it clear that the claim and specification of the Macdonald patent must be construed to include, as their language requires, a fluted or plaited band or border as one of the essential elements of the invention. Without this element the patent would not have been issued. The patent-office decided * * * that without it the invention had been anticipated. * * *”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. In re Wesseler · Rembert Roller Compress Co. v. American Cotton Co.

3. ““ ‘If an applicant, in order to get his patent, accepts one with a narrower claim than that contained in his original application, he is bound by it. If dissatisfied with the decision rejecting his application, he should pursue his remedy by appeal.’ ” 179 U.S. at 83 , 21 S.Ct. at 26 .”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Welsbach Light Co. v. Cremo Incandescent Light Co. · H. M. Chase Corp. v. Idaho Potato Processors, Inc.