Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 171 F.2d 957 - Birmingham v. Randall

Birmingham v. Randall’s Empirical Analysis

171 F.2d 957 · 1948

Citation profile

12
cited by 12 later decisions
January 1991
most recently cited

5 federal appellate · 1 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 12 later decisions — most recently January 1991

5 federal appellate · 1 district ·

50194819501960197019801990decided

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 McBride v. Teeple · 18 App. D.C. 1 - Lindemeyr v. Hoffman · Steenstrup v. Heath · 25 App. D.C. 77 - Gallagher v. Hien · Buffington v. Blair

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

  1. “* * * the evidence concerning the work done by Breen in 1951 does not establish an actual reduction to practice of the invention in issue. Breen et al. accordingly have not established an actual reduction to practice prior to the date accorded Richmond et al. for reduction to practice and are the second to reduce to practice. Since Breen et al. have not established the diligence required of the second to reduce to practice, priority will be awarded to Richmond et al., the first to complete the invention by constructively reducing it to practice.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “* * * The failure of appellee to file an application covering the invention in issue for more than seven years after the last-mentioned experiments also raises a strong presumption that the results of those experiments were not considered satisfactory.”
    1 later decision 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.