Freeman v. Brenner’s Empirical Analysis
1966
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 1 district ·
Relationships
Applies 35 U.S.C. § 103 · 35 U.S.C. § 145
Relies on Graham v. John Deere Company of Kansas City Calmar Inc · Atlantio Works v. Brady Brady · Zenith Radio Corp. v. Ladd · Stieg v. Commissioner of Patents · Goodyear Tire and Rubber Company v. David L. Ladd, Commissioner of Patents
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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““It is not disputed that the plaintiff has made an advance in the art. His contribution appears to be praiseworthy and useful. It is not, however, every advance, every improvement, and every new idea that is accorded a patent monopoly under the patent law. In order to be worthy of a patent, the improvement or the advance must be more than the product of mechanical skill of a person ordinarily skilled in the art in which he works. It must be the product of what has been called the inventive faculty.” 261 F.Supp. at 287 .”
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.