Singh v. Brake’s Empirical Analysis
317 F.3d 1334 · 2003
Citation profile
13 federal appellate · 12 district ·
Relationships
Relies on Consolo v. Federal Maritime Commission · Eibel Process Co. v. Minnesota & Ontario Paper Co. · Dickinson v. Zurko · In re Gartside · Hybritech Inc. v. Monoclonal Antibodies, Inc.
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 36 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Accordingly, we review de novo the Board's legal conclusions with respect to priority, conception, and reduction to practice ..., and we review factual findings by the Board for substantial evidence.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“Priority, conception, and reduction to practice are questions of law which are based on subsidiary factual findings.”
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.