Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 357 F.2d 385 - In re Lunsford

In re Lunsford’s Empirical Analysis

357 F.2d 385 · 1966

Citation profile

15
cited by 15 later decisions
June 2013
most recently cited

3 federal appellate ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 15 later decisions — most recently June 2013

3 federal appellate ·

90196619701980199020002010decided

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. § 103

Relies on Graham v. John Deere Company of Kansas City Calmar Inc · In re Sinex · Larsen · In re Bergel · In re Wesslau

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 15 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “Moreover, as a matter of law under 35 U.S.C. 103, the examiner must substantiate his “suspicions” on the basis of facts drawn from proper prior art. The issue to be resolved requires more than “suspicions;” it requires facts.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
    e.g. In re Dillon · In Re Diane M Dillon
  2. “[I]t is reasonably clear that the examiner considered only the difference in structures between the claimed compounds and the prior art compounds. Appellant was entitled to have differences between the claimed invention, the subject matter as a whole, and the prior art references of record evaluated.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
    e.g. In re Dillon
  3. “The argument that the “subject matter as a whole” under 35 U.S.C. 103 includes the compound and its utility is considered to be without merit.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
    e.g. In re 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.