Koehring Co. v. National Automatic Tool Co.’s Empirical Analysis
362 F.2d 100 · 1966
Citation profile
31 federal appellate · 3 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 53 later decisions — most recently May 1993 · most notably Corporation v. Raymond International Inc (1980), Sauquoit Fibers Co. v. Leesona Corp. (1974)
31 federal appellate · 3 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 Egbert v. Lippmann · Hall v. Macneale · Consolidated Fruit-Jar Co. v. Wright · Metallizing Engineering Co. v. Kenyon Bearing & Auto Parts Co. · Watson v. Allen
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 53 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““A reasonable period of experimentation wherein the inventor may perfect what he has conceived has long been acknowledged as an exception to the requirement of seasonable disclosure. But this exception must be recognized as such; it must be so limited as not to interfere with the effectuation of the policy underlying the general rule of early disclosure. An inventor may not be permitted to use a period of experimentation as a competitive tool. The use [of an invention] ceases to be experimental when the motivation of the inventor is to exploit the invention and gain a competitive advantage over others.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“once a single use of an operative device embodying the invention prior to the critical date has been shown the inventor must carry the burden of proving that the use was part of a bona fide program of experimentation.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority““Again the desirability of such testing is not disputed. But an invention or potential patentee may not enjoy the best of two possible worlds.””
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.