In re Wesselman’s Empirical Analysis
127 F.2d 311 · 1942
Citation profile
How this case has been cited
Cited by 19 later decisions — most recently June 1975
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 In re Wagenhorst · In re Rosenblatt · In re Schneider · In re Wheeler · In re Thomas
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 19 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“* * * we would observe that in appellant's brief he contends that it was improper under the circumstances to join his co-pending patent application with the disclosure of the Johnson patent, and, secondly, that even though such joining was proper, nevertheless the combination is patentable. 31 "It is so obvious that these matters should have been set forth in appellant's reasons of appeal that further discussion is unnecessary.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. In re Gruschwitz · In re Gruschwitz““The Board of Appeals erred in affirming the reason of the primary examiner finally rejecting claims 1, 4, 6, 7, 8, and 10 of the above-entitled application.””
3 later decisions quote this exact passage““1. The Board of Appeals erred in affirming the primary examiner’s final rejection of claims 16 and 17 as amended to date.””
3 later decisions 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.