Convolve, Inc. v. Compaq Computer Corp.’s Empirical Analysis
2004
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 1 district · 1 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 35 U.S.C. § 284
Relies on Arizona v. California · Read Corporation Ft v. Portec Inc · Underwater Devices Incorporated v. Morrison-Knudsen Company, Inc., Morrison-Knudsen Company, Inc. v. Lester A. Haug, Don W. Schmid and Herman Gunther · United States v. Adlman · Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Company v. Johnson & Johnson Orthopaedics Inc
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 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“internal communications on the same subjects as the formal [Sekimura] opinions, communications between Seagate and any attorneys on the same subjects as the formal opinions, documents reflecting outside counsel’s opinion as to the same subjects of the formal opinions, documents reviewed or considered, or forming the basis for outside counsel’s opinion as to the subject matter of the formal opinions, and documents reflecting when oral communications concerning the subjects of the opinions occurred between Compaq and outside counsel.”
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.