Smith v. Hall’s Empirical Analysis
301 U.S. 216 · 1937
Citation profile
180 federal appellate · 33 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 329 later decisions (11 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 2011 · most notably Marconi Wireless Telegraph Co. of America v. United States (1943), Dow Chemical Co. v. Halliburton Oil Well Cementing Co. (1945)
180 federal appellate · 33 district ·
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Appellate journey
reviewedSmith v. Hall (from Second Circuit Court of Appeals)
Relationships
Relies on Eibel Process Co. v. Minnesota & Ontario Paper Co. · Washburn Moen Manuf'G Co v. Beat 'Em All Barbed-Wire Co · Alexander Milburn Co. v. Davis-Bournonville Co. · Smith v. Snow · Deering v. Winona Harvester Works
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 329 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“the heavy burden of persuasion which rests upon one who seeks to negative novelty in a patent by showing prior use.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““[A patentee], having sought and obtained a broad construction of his claim, cannot [thereafter] narrow it so as to avoid anticipation by showing that the claimed method was used in a particular form of structure not claimed.” Smith v. Hall, 301 U.S. 216, 232 , 57 S.Ct. 711, 718 , 81 L.Ed. 1049 (1937).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“oral testimony . . . without corroboration . . . is insufficient to establish prior use.”
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.