Micon v. Burton-Dixie Corp.’s Empirical Analysis
147 F.2d 19 · 1945
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 1 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently February 1971
2 federal appellate · 1 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
Applies 35 U.S.C. § 31
Relies on Carnegie Steel Company v. Cambria Iron Company · Alexander Milburn Co. v. Davis-Bournonville Co. · Minerals Separation North American Corp. v. Magma Copper Co. · Shipp v. Scott School Tp.
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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““ * * * patentable novelty or invention calls for something more than the skill of the mechanic.” Chicago Steel Foundry Co. v. Burnside Steel Foundry Co., 7 Cir., 1943, 132 F.2d 812 , 815. One need not be skilled to realize that appellant’s process might be effective without the screen. In Micon v. Burton-Dixie Corp., 147 F.2d 19 , 21, the Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit said: “Novelty is negatived by a full description, in the specification of a prior public patent, of the subject covered by an American patent, even though that subject was not covered by any of the claims of the prior patent. Walker on Patents, Deller’s Ed., vol. 1, p. 276; Alexander Milburn Co. v. Davis-Bournonville Co., 270 U.S. 390 , 46 S.Ct. 324 , 70 L.Ed. 651 ; Minerals Separation North American Corp. v. Magma Copper Co., 280 U.S. 400 , 50 S.Ct. 185 , 74 L.Ed. 511 . * * *””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Smith v. Kingsland
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.