Anthony v. Ranco Inc.’s Empirical Analysis
316 F.2d 509 · 1963
Citation profile
9 federal appellate ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 14 later decisions — most recently April 1983
9 federal appellate ·
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.
Relationships
Relies on Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co. v. Supermarket Equipment Corp. · Cuno Engineering Corporation v. Automatic Devices Corporation · Lincoln Engineering Co of Illinois v. Stewart-Warner Corporation · Mast Foos Company v. Stover Manufacturing Company · Hailes v. Van Wormer
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 14 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““in sum all that appellant did was to apply a known value to an analogous use in a known combination or system. This is not invention. Such advance in the art, if advance there was, merely resulted from that type of activity reasonably to be expected of those me chanically skilled in the applicable art.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Ramirez v. Perez · Ramirez v. Perez
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.