Butler v. Shaw’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

15 federal appellate · 3 district ·

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

1. “‘Whenever a patent on application is refused, either by the Commissioner of Patents or by the Supreme Court of the District of Columbia upon appeal from the commissioner, the applicant may have remedy by bill in equity; and the court having cognizance thereof, on notice to adverse parties and other due proceedings had, may adjudge that such applicant is entitled, according to law, to receive a patent for his invention, as specified in his claim, or for any part thereof, as the facts in the case may appear. And such adjudication, if it- be in favor of the right of the applicant, shall authorize the commissioner to issue such patent on the applicant filing in the Patent Office a copy of the' adjudication, and otherwise complying with the requirements of law. In all eases where there is no opposing party, a copy of the bill shall be served on the commissioner; and all the expenses of the proceedings shall be paid by the applicant, whether the final decision is in his favor or not.””

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Gandy v. Marble · Appert v. Brownsville Plate Glass Co.

2. “a suit within the ordinary jurisdiction in equity of the courts ... the statute contains no provision requiring the case to be heard upon the evidence produced before the commissioner ... as has been held in this and other circuits, the court may receive new evidence, and has the same powers as in other cases in equity”). 4 . Although not considered below or raised or argued by the parties on appeal, the majority contends that the APA requires”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Hyatt v. Doll

3. “.“That the determination of appeals from the decision of the commissioner of patents, now vested in the general term of the supreme court of the District of Columbia * * * shall hereafter be and the same is hereby vested in the court of appeals created by this act; and, in addition, any party aggrieved by a decision of the commissioner of patents in any interference case may appeal therefrom to the said court of appeals.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Smith v. Muller