Edison Electric Light Co. v. United States Electric Lighting Co.’s Empirical Analysis
35 F. 134 · 1888
Citation profile
4
cited by 4 later decisions
2
cited 2 times by the Supreme Court
February 1902
most recently cited
Relationships
Relies on Root v. Railway Co. · United States v. Bowen · Edward Livingston v. Benjamin Story · Wickliffe v. Owings · Bate Refigerating Co. v. Gillett
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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The real inquiry is whether the section limits the term of a domestic patent to the term of a foreign patent when the- application for the foreign patent is not.made until subsequent to the application in this country, but the foreign patent issues before the domestic patent. If it were proper to treat this question as an original one, it would be necessary first to inquire whether there is any ambiguity in the language of the statute. If there is not, the duty of the court is to give effect to its obvious meaning, notwithstanding it may be thought to make an unreasonable and harsh innovation upon the preexisting privileges of our own inventors. It is not only the safer course to adhere to the words of a statute, construed in their ordinary import, instead of entering into any inquiry as to the supposed intention of Congress, but it. is the' imperative duty of the court to do so. Where the meaning of the Revised Statutes is plain the court cannot look to the sources of the revision to ascertain whether errors have or have not been committed by the revisers. United States v. Bowen, 100 U. S. 508 . There is no practical difference in the phraseology of section 4887 and that of section 25 of the act of July 8, 1870, from which the section is reproduced.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“by reason of its [the invention] having been first patented or caused to be patented in a foreign country.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“patent granted for an invention which has been previously patented in a foreign country”
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.