In re Campbell’s Empirical Analysis
212 F.2d 606 · 1954
Citation profile
1 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 18 later decisions — most recently June 1989
1 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
Applies 35 U.S.C. § 102 · 35 U.S.C. § 111 · 35 U.S.C. § 121 · 35 U.S.C. § 132 · 35 U.S.C. § 171
Relies on Hartford-Empire Co. v. United States · Chapman v. Wintroath · Godfrey v. Eames · Dwight & Lloyd Sintering Co. v. Greenawalt · Swihart v. United States
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 18 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The Patent Office has here deprived appellant of a substantial property right by a process of reasoning which exploits the trivial and ignores that which is vital and important. The Supreme Court has recently reiterated the long established rule which governs here, namely, that “ ‘A party seeking a right under the patent statutes may avail himself of all their provisions, and the courts may not deny him the benefit of a single one. These are questions not of natural but of purely statutory right.’ ” Hartford-Empire Co. v. United States, 323 U.S. 386 , 433 [ 65 S.Ct. 373 , 396, 89 L.Ed. 322 (1945)], citing Chapman v. Wintroath, 252 U.S. 126 , at 137 [ 40 S.Ct. 234 , 236, 64 L.Ed. 491 (1920)].”
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.