Haliczer v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
356 F.2d 541 · 1966
Citation profile
5 federal appellate · 2 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 40 later decisions — most recently January 2011 · most notably MBO Laboratories, Inc. v. Becton, Dickinson & Co. (2007), Ball Corporation v. United States (1984)
5 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
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1498 · 35 U.S.C. § 251 · 35 U.S.C. § 282
Relies on Altoona Publix Theatres, Inc. v. American Tri-Ergon Corp. · Schriber-Schroth Co. v. Cleveland Trust Co. · Exhibit Supply Co. v. Ace Patents Corp. · Smith v. Magic City Kennel Club, Inc. · Williams Mfg Co v. United Shoe Machinery Corporation
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 40 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“deliberate withdrawal or amendment cannot be said to involve the inadvertence or mistake contemplated by 35 U.S.C. § 251.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[T]he deliberate cancellation of claims in order to obtain a patent constitutes a bar to obtaining these same claims by inclusion in a reissue patent.”
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.