Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 121 F.2d 514 - Kyrides v. Andersen

Kyrides v. Andersen’s Empirical Analysis

121 F.2d 514 · 1941

Citation profile

26
cited by 26 later decisions
May 2012
most recently cited

1 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 26 later decisions — most recently May 2012 · most notably Den Beste v. Martin (1958), In re Kyrides (1947)

1 district ·

13019411950196019701980199020002010decided

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 Automatic Weighing Mach. Co. v. Pneumatic Scale Corp. · In re Steenbock · In re Langmuir · In re Walker · United States v. Goings

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

  1. ““The issue presented in this appeal is not whether appellant is entitled to a patent for a composition embodying a cellulose derivative and containing as plasticizers the subgeneric class of alkyl acetonyl phtha-lates, but rather whether having constructively reduced to practice a composition embodying a cellulose derivative and containing as a plasticizer an alkyl acetonyl phthalate (acetonyl ethyl phthalate, one of the members of the subgeneric class) long prior to appellees’ constructive reduction to practice, appellant is entitled to an award of priority of invention.””
    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.