Ottah v. BMW’s Empirical Analysis
2017
Citation profile
1 federal appellate ·
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1338
Relies on Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc. · Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly · Markman v. Westview Instruments, Inc. · Phillips v. AWH Corp. · Union Paper-Bag Machine Company v. Murphy
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 1 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“limitation of claim 1, because the camera holders on their vehicles cannot be removed without tools. The district court granted the MTD Defendants' motion to dismiss with prejudice, characterizing Ottah's arguments as”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“[t]he '840 patent contains no claim that can be plausibly construed to cover a mobile camera device, a mounted camera, or any kind of camera.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“[t]he fact that [Ottah's] book holder could be used to hold a camera does not make it the equivalent of a mobile camera.”
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.