Carson Optical Inc. v. eBay Inc.’s Empirical Analysis
2016
Citation profile
1 district ·
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1659 · 35 U.S.C. § 271 · 35 U.S.C. § 298
Relies on Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly · Ashcroft v. Iqbal · Ashcroft v. al-Kidd · Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Studios Inc. v. Grokster, Ltd. · Mills v. Polar Molecular Corp.
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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled to relief, in order to give the defendant fair notice of what the ... claim is and the grounds upon which it rests.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“[A] court is neither obligated to reconcile the pleadings with the other matter nor accept the allegation in the pleadings as true in deciding a motion to dismiss.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“Whoever offers to sell or sells within the United States or imports into the United States a component of a patented machine, manufacture, combination or composition, or a material or apparatus for use in practicing a patented process, constituting a material part of the invention, knowing the same to be especially made or especially adapted for use in an infringement of such patent, and not a staple article or commodity of commerce suitable for substantial non-infringing use, shall be liable as a contributory infringer.”
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.