Ballantyne Instruments & Electronics, Inc. v. Wagner’s Empirical Analysis
345 F.2d 671 · 1965
Citation profile
13 federal appellate · 1 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 21 later decisions — most recently October 1984
13 federal appellate · 1 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
Applies 35 U.S.C. § 102 · 35 U.S.C. § 282
Relies on Seymour v. Osborne · Eames v. Andrews · Cohn v. United States Corset Co. · Allied Wheel Products, Inc. v. Rude · Bobertz v. General Motors Corp.
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 21 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“in a printed publication . . . more than one year prior to the date of the application,”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“To constitute a “description” of the patented invention within the meaning of 35 U.S.C. § 102 (b) the prior publication must describe the invention as claimed in such full, clear and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art or science to which the invention appertains, to practice the invention. Vague and general representations are not sufficient in law to support the defense of anticipation under 35 U.S.C. § 102 (b). The Patent Claim 1 1. No mention is made of angular correction of the placement of the probe head. 2. The probe head contains two signal sources, each of which is capable of transmitting simultaneously at least two ultrasonic signal modes, as well as a pick-up means to receive the simultaneous signals. 3. The receiving device correlates the signals of several modes at once. The Patent Claim 2 1. No mention is made of angular correction of the placement of the probe head. 2. There is one probe which contains signal sources to utilize longitudinal, shear and surface modes simultaneously with one insertion. 3. The receiving device correlates the signals of several modes at once. The Patent Claim 3 1. No mention is made of angular correction of the placement of the probe head. 2. The probe contains two sources of ultrasonic signals which can utilize two modes simultaneously. The receiving device correlates the signals of several modes at once. 3.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage““The public interest in every patent case requires that suits involving the validity of patents should be speedily determined. Thus, wherever patent litigation can be expeditiously handled on motions for summary judgment it should be done provided the necessary safeguards to protect the rights of the litigants are observed. One such safeguard is that there be no real question of fact involved.””
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.