Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 185 F.2d 686 - In re Arnold

In re Arnold’s Empirical Analysis

185 F.2d 686 · 1950

Citation profile

5
cited by 5 later decisions
May 1968
most recently cited

3 federal appellate ·

Relationships

Relies on Funk Bros. Seed Co. v. Kalo Inoculant Co. · Davison Chemical Corp. v. Joliet Chemicals, Inc. · Allen v. Coe · In re Walker

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

  1. ““Appellant has not invented any new art or improvement embodying or utilizing his discovery of a scientific or natural principle; rather he has used a well known procedure for bonding by means of a high frequency field and merely selected the particular frequency to be used in that procedure which the scientific principle he has discovered indicates to be appropriate.””
    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.