Moore v. Baltimore & O. R.’s Empirical Analysis
37 F.2d 884 · 1930
Citation profile
5 federal appellate ·
Relationships
Applies 35 U.S.C. § 31
Relies on Atlantio Works v. Brady Brady · Hailes v. Van Wormer · Lovell Manuf'G Co v. Cary · Berlin Mills Co. v. Procter & Gamble Co. · New York Scaffolding Co. v. Liebel-Binney Construction Co.
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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Complainant objects that some of the evidence as to prior use relates to use within two years of his application; but this is entirely immaterial. It is true that, under section 4886 of the Revised Statutes ( 35 U.S.C.A. § 31 ), public use of the subject matter of an invention for not more than two years prior to an application will not bar the inventor’s right to a patent; but this applies where the applicant is the inventor. Where the device used was not invented by the applicant, but devised by others, it constitutes an anticipation irrespective of the period by which it antedates his supposed invention. To be patentable, the device must be new; and it is not new if others have already made use of it. Walker on Patents (6th Ed.) §§ 110 and 111.””
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.