Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 148 F. Supp. 373 - Shell Development Co. v. Watson

148 F. Supp. 373 - Shell Development Co. v. Watson’s Empirical Analysis

1957

Citation profile

8
cited by 8 later decisions
March 1967
most recently cited

8 district ·

Relationships

Applies 35 U.S.C. § 145

Relies on Traitel Marble Co. v. U. T. Hunger-Ford Brass & Copper Co.

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

  1. ““Assuming for argument, that the law is absolute that there can be no patent for the new use of an old thing, that is because the statute allows no monopolies merely for ideas or discoveries. If the thing itself be new, very slight structural changes may be enough to support a- patent, when they presuppose a use not discoverable without inventive imagination. We are to judge such devices, not by the mere innovation in their form or ma- . terial, but by the purpose which dictated them and discovered their function.””
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.