Competitive Technologies v. Fujitsu Ltd.’s Empirical Analysis
2003
Citation profile
2 federal appellate ·
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 112 · 35 U.S.C. § 112
Relies on Warner-Jenkinson Company Inc v. Hilton Davis Chemical Co · Markman v. Westview Instruments, Inc. · Vitronics Corporation v. Conceptronic Inc · Autogiro Co. of America v. United States · Southwall Technologies, Inc. v. Cardinal IG Co.
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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“a plurality of X and Y dimension address electrodes, intersections between said address electrodes defining address cells; address means for applying a signal to selected X and Y address electrodes to discharge at least one selected address cell associated unth said electrode and create wall charges at said selected cell; sustain means for subsequently energizing said address electrodes, which energization in combination with said wall charges at said selected cell discharges said cell ...”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
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.