Glikin v. Smith’s Empirical Analysis
269 F.2d 641 · 1959
Citation profile
10 federal appellate ·
Relationships
Relies on Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co. v. Supermarket Equipment Corp. · Cuno Engineering Corporation v. Automatic Devices Corporation · Atlantio Works v. Brady Brady · Alexander Milburn Co. v. Davis-Bournonville Co. · Leeds Catlin Company v. Victor Talking Machine Company
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 17 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““A presumption of validity attaches to a patent. Because of this presumption and because a patent is a legislatively condoned monopoly that is not granted willy nilly to just any advance or improvement in commerce, combination patents are viewed strictly. This is particularly true where the elements in the combination are old and known to the art, since a liberal construction of such combination claims would erase the line, such as it is, between mechanical judgment and inventive skill.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“In this proceeding we see Smith as attempting to assert a patent monopoly over efficient and commercially successful hearing aid eyeglasses which owe their efficiency and success to scientific advances with which Smith had nothing to do.”
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.