In re Finley’s Empirical Analysis
174 F.2d 130 · 1949
Citation profile
4 federal appellate · 2 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 24 later decisions — most recently July 1979
4 federal appellate · 2 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
Relies on In re Kepler · In re Hass · In re Von Bramer · Steverson v. Clark · In re Merz
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 24 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“* * * we do not feel, viewing the record in the light of the authorities cited [which did not consider that unexpected results could rebut a prima facie showing of obviousness], that the grant of the patent sought would be proper * * *,”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage““But to assert that the property of the salt or of the oil is the property of the ester is clearly a confusion of the issue.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. In re Papesch
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.