Gfi Inc v. Franklin Corporation Washington Furniture Manufacturing Co Astro Lounger Furniture Manufacturing’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

23 federal appellate · 17 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 95 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “materiality does not presume intent, which is a separate and essential component of inequitable conduct.”

   5 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Sanofi-Synthelabo v. Apotex, Inc. · 727 F. Supp. 2d 310 - Cordance Corp. v. Amazon. Com, Inc.

2. “We apply regional circuit law to procedural questions that are not themselves substantive patent law issues so long as they do not (1) pertain to patent law, ... (2) bear an essential relationship to matters committed to our exclusive control by statute, or (3) clearly implicate the jurisprudential responsibilities of this court in a field within its exclusive jurisdiction.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Martin Marietta Materials, Inc. v. Bedford Reinforced Plastics, Inc. · 707 F. Supp. 2d 463 - Brigham & Women's Hospital Inc. v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc.

3. “[A] patentee facing a high level of materiality and clear proof that it knew or should have known of that materiality, can expect to find it difficult to establish subject good faith sufficient to prevent the drawing of an inference of intent to mislead.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Warner-Lambert Company Ag v. Teva Pharmaceuticals Usa Inc · Agfa Corporation v. Creo Products Inc.