Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp. v. Eon Labs Manufacturing, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

7 federal appellate · 7 district ·

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.

1. “Because words often have multiple dictionary definitions, some having no relation to the claimed invention, the intrinsic record must always be consulted to identify which of the different possible dictionary meanings of the claim terms in issue is most consistent with the use of the words by the inventor.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Nystrom v. Trex Co.

2. “In Novartis, we held that when the dictionary definition `yields a range of possible meanings consisting of two competing definitions,' we look to intrinsic evidence `to determine as a matter of claim interpretation which of the available relevant definitions should be applied to the claim term at issue.'”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Nystrom v. Trex Co.

3. “While none of the statements in the intrinsic record is an explicit disclaimer of subject matter sufficient to vary the scope of the claim from its ordinary meaning, these statements are helpful in guiding us to choose between competing dictionary definitions of a claim term.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Nystrom v. Trex Co.