In re Moeller’s Empirical Analysis
117 F.2d 565 · 1941
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 3 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 29 later decisions — most recently October 2008 · most notably SmithKline Beecham Corp. v. Apotex Corp. (2006), Atlantic Thermoplastics Co. v. Faytex Corp. (1992)
3 federal appellate · 3 district ·
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 General Electric Co. v. Wabash Appliance Corp. · In re Butler · In re Merz · Bituminous Products Co. v. Headley Good Roads Co. · In re Brown
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 29 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“We think the rule is well established that where one has produced an article in which invention rests over prior art articles, and where it is not possible to define the characteristics which make it inventive except by referring to the process by which the article is made, he is permitted to so claim his article, but is limited in his protection to articles produced by his method referred to in the claims.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“[T]he article itself must be inventive and patentably distinct from such articles disclosed in the prior art.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
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.