Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 26 FSUPP2D 811 - Enpat, Inc. v. Microsoft Corp.

Enpat, Inc. v. Microsoft Corp.’s Empirical Analysis

1998

Citation profile

2
cited by 2 later decisions
July 2000
most recently cited

2 district ·

Relationships

Applies 35 U.S.C. § 285

Relies on Lam, Inc. v. Johns-Manville Corp. · Beckman Instruments, Inc. v. LKB Produkter AB · Haynes International, Inc. v. Jessop Steel Co. · Eltech Systems Corporation v. Ppg Industries Inc · Judin 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 2 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “A ease is “exceptional” where the plaintiff has engaged in “vexatious or unjustified litigation” or “frivolous suit.” Beckman Instruments, Inc. v. LKB Produkter AB, 892 F.2d 1547, 1551 (Fed.Cir.1989). A suit is frivolous where the patentee knew, or should have known by reasonable investigation, that the suit was groundless. Haynes Int’l, Inc. v. Jessop Steel Co., 8 F.3d 1573, 1579 (Fed.Cir.1993). Similarly, a court may infer bad faith where a “patentee is manifestly unreasonable in assessing infringement, while continuing to assert infringement in court.” Eltech Sys. Corp. v. PPG Indus., 903 F.2d 805, 811 (Fed.Cir.1990).”
    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.