Ruschig’s Empirical Analysis
Citation profile
3 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 25 later decisions — most recently September 2011 · most notably Ruschig, In Re Diane M Dillon
3 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.
Relationships
Relies on In re Petering · In re Thuau · Application of Gene O Sinex · In re Riden · In re Lambooy
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 25 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““We did not intend our Petering opinion or decision to become a precedent for the mechanistic dissection and recombination of the components of the specific illustrative compounds in every chemical reference containing them, to create hindsight anticipations with the guidance of an applicant's disclosures, on the theory that such reconstructed disclosures describe specific compounds within the meaning of section 102.” ( 343 F.2d 974 — emphasis the Court’s.)”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“mere possibility that someone might wish to use some of them for some such [other] purpose”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“the vague 'basket' disclosure of possible uses in the [prior art] are unimportant. What is important is the fact that the utility discovered by the appellants is not disclosed in the prior art.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. In Re Diane M Dillon
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.