In re Haruna’s Empirical Analysis
249 F.3d 1327 · 2001
Citation profile
5 federal appellate · 1 district ·
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1295 · 35 U.S.C. § 103
Relies on Inwood Laboratories, Inc. v. Ives Laboratories, Inc. · Qualitex Co. v. Jacobson Products Co. · In re Gartside · Avia Group International, Inc. v. L.A. Gear California, Inc. · Litton Systems, Inc. v. Whirlpool Corp.
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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The obviousness of a design `is determined by ascertaining whether the applicable prior art contains any suggestion or motivation for making the modifications in the design of the prior art article in order to produce the claimed design.'”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.