Talbert Fuel Systems Patents Co. v. Unocal Corp.’s Empirical Analysis
275 F.3d 1371 · 2002
Citation profile
6 federal appellate · 3 district ·
Relationships
Relies on MARKMAN Et Al. v. WESTVIEW INSTRUMENTS, INC., Et Al. · Warner-Jenkinson Company Inc v. Hilton Davis Chemical Co · Markman v. Westview Instruments, Inc. · Cybor Corporation v. Fas Technologies, Inc., and Fastar Ltd., Defendants-Cross · Continental Can Company Usa Inc v. Monsanto 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 13 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[A] construction that renders the claimed invention inoperable should be viewed with extreme skepticism.” (citation omitted)). 2 . By rearranging the language of the Thorax advertisement, the dissent makes it appear that the advertisement and the proposed label both recommend administering a starting dose of 0.25 to 0.5 mg twice daily followed by eventual reduction to the lowest effective dose. But the facts do not support that suggestion. The Thorax advertisement actually specifies higher levels of initial recommended twice daily dosing and then goes on to state that ''[t]he maintenance dose should be the lowest dose which keeps the patient symptom-free. Recommended doses are: 0.25-0.5 mg twice daily.”
3 later decisions 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.