Universal Marion Corporation v. The Warner & Swasey Company’s Empirical Analysis
354 F.2d 541 · 1965
Citation profile
7 federal appellate · 2 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 11 later decisions — most recently July 1980
7 federal appellate · 2 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 Dardi v. United States · Eames v. Andrews · McCullough Tool Co. v. Well Surveys, Inc. · Preformed Line Products Company v. The Fanner Manufacturing Company, Preformed Line Products Company, Plaintiff-Cross-Appellant v. The Fanner Manufacturing Company, Defendant-Cross-Appellee · King-Seeley Thermos Co. v. Refrigerated Dispensers, 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 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““It is contended that the use of the early Ferwerda machines constitutes a public use within the meaning of the statute. It is well settled that all uses do not necessarily constitute a public use. ‘Use by an inventor in good faith for the purpose of testing his apparatus or device for experimental purposes is not public use within the scope of the statute, even though incidental to such use he derives some financial return.’ Merrill v. Builders Ornamental Iron Co., 10 Cir., 197 F.2d 16, 19 . See, also, McCullough Tool Co. v. Well Surveys, Inc., 343 F.2d at 393-394 . The trial court found that the use of the machine more than one year prior to the application for patent was a good-faith use for experimental purposes and not a public use.””
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.