Clontech Laboratories, Inc. v. Invitrogen Corp.’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 federal appellate · 3 district ·

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.

1. “(a) Whoever marks upon, or affixes to, or uses in advertising in connection with any unpatented article, the word “patent” or any word or number importing that the same is patented for the purpose of deceiving the public ... shall be fined not more than $500 for every such offense. (b) Any person may sue for the penalty, in which event one-half shall go to the person suing and the other to the use of the United States.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 733 F. Supp. 2d 552 - Brinkmeier v. BIC CORP.

2. “a gene which encodes reverse transcriptase having DNA polymerase activity and substantially no RNase H activity.” See Clontech Labs., Inc. v. Invitrogen Corp., 263 F.Supp.2d 780, 785 ¶¶ 17, 20-22 (D.Del.2003). According to the Federal Circuit, however, the '608 patent”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 434 F. Supp. 2d 445 - DP Wagner Manufacturing Inc. v. Pro Patch Systems, Inc.

3. “[a]t the very least, these tests put [Invitrogen] on notice that its products were not covered by the patents in suit and any good faith belief that [Invitrogen] had that its products were covered by the patents was lost.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Clontech Laboratories, Inc. v. Invitrogen Corp.