Josserand v. Taylor’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

4 federal appellate · 2 district · 1 state decisions

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

1. ““ * * * The petition, although not so denominated, is in effect a bill of review or an application for leave to file a bill of review in the Patent Office, it being claimed that the party Josserand perpetrated a fraud upon this court in the interference proceeding in which priority of the invention, defined by the count in issue, was awarded to him. * * * * * “We have given most careful consideration to the issues presented by counsel for appellee, in view of the seriousness of the charges presented, but are of opinion that the record before us wholly fails to establish that appellant Josserand either ‘confessed’ or ‘virtually confessed’ that he committed a fraud on this court, or that he repudiated his testimony or that of his witnesses in the interference proceeding or that any fraud was committed by appellant Josserand as to any material issue in that proceeding. In so holding we are not unmindful of the rule that, if the court had any serious doubt as to whether appellant Josserand perpetrated a fraud, extrinsic, or collateral to the issues determined in the interference case, or if the question of such fraud was difficult of ascertainment, it would be the duty of the court to grant appellee’s application for leave to file a bill of review in the Patent Office. “It should be understood that the issue of public use by the party Josserand of the invention defined by the count involved in the interference was not before us in the interference case, nor is it present in the i”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. In re Josserand