Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 155 F.2d 540 - In re Barnett

In re Barnett’s Empirical Analysis

155 F.2d 540 · 1946

Citation profile

18
cited by 18 later decisions
June 1963
most recently cited

How this case has been cited

Cited by 18 later decisions — most recently June 1963

120194619501960decided

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 Ernst · Dececo Co. v. George E. Gilchrist Co. · In re Prescott · In re Einstein · In re McCurdy

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

  1. “If the machine performs a new, useful, inventive method, the party is entitled to method claims along with his machine claims not only because his method requires protection but because they are related inventions.”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent

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.