Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 22 F.1d 159 - Odell v. Stout

Odell v. Stout’s Empirical Analysis

22 F. 159 · 1884

Citation profile

12
cited by 12 later decisions
2
cited 2 times by the Supreme Court
April 1933
most recently cited

6 federal appellate · 3 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 12 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently April 1933

6 federal appellate · 3 district ·

40188418901900191019201930decided

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 Loom Company v. Higgins · Miller v. Brass Co. · Roberts v. Ryer · James v. Campbell · Gage v. Herring

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

  1. ““It is settled that ‘an invention relating to machinery may bo exhibited either in a drawing or in a model, so as to lay the foundation of a claim to priority, if it be sufficiently plain to enable those skilled in the art to understand it.’ Loom Co. v. Higgins, 105 U. S. 594 , 26 L. Ed. 1177 . But this rule is to bo taken with proper qualifications. Drawings may carry date of invention back if reasonable diligence is shown. Kneeland v. Sheriff, 18 O. G. 242. Making drawings of an idea is not invention, and is of no effect unless followed up. Draper v. Potomska Mills, 13 O. G. 276, Fed. Cas. No. 4,072. Merely making drawings is not such an embodiment of invention as will defeat a subsequent patent. Ellithorp v. Robertson. 4 Blatchf. 807 , Fed. Cas. No. 4,408. The reasons for this qualification of the rule are well stated in section 61, Walker on Patents.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. ““If a defendant, luis, before suit brought, abandoned the manufacture and sale of 1lie infringing machine, and the Court is satisfied that the abandonment was in good faith and final, the injunction ought; to be refused, upon the principles of equity applicable to injunction.””
    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.