Bluestone v. Schmerling’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

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 13 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““It is questionable whether the issue of res judicata is properly before this court since it was not specifically raised by any reason of appeal.”' [Emphasis mine.]”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. In re Gruschwitz · In re Gruschwitz

2. “Appellant by his arguments and by his reliance on Smith v. Bousquet, [ 27 CCPA 1136 , 111 F.2d 157 , 45 USPQ 347 ] which decision was concerned primarily with actual, rather than constructive, reduction to practice, appears to contend that it was incumbent on Schmerling to prove that the compounds will function as stated in his application. We do not understand that to be the law. In the absence of any apparent reason why the compounds disclosed will not so function, or of any evidence showing that they actually do not, the statements in the application are generally deemed sufficient. In re Chilowsky, 229 F.2d 457 , 43 CCPA 775 , [ 108 USPQ 321 ]. [Emphasis supplied.]”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. In re Gazave · Application of Jean Maurice Gazave