John E. Lindberg, Jr. v. Edward J. Brenner, Commissioner of Patents’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

4 federal appellate · 2 district · 1 state decisions

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

1. ““We believe that appellee properly invokes the rule set forth in, e. g., Bate Refrigerating Co. v. Sulzberger, 157 U.S. 1 , 15 S.Ct. 508 , 39 L.Ed. 601 (1894), that ‘if there be reasonable ground for adopting either of two constructions, this court, without departing from sound principle, may well adopt that construction which is in harmony with the settled practice of the executive branch of the government * * *.’ 157 U.S. at 34 , 15 S.Ct. at 515 . When statutes are susceptible of different readings it is practically axiomatic that ‘administrative interpretation, practice and usage is accorded great weight as an extrinsic aid in the interpretation of statutes by courts.’ 3 Sutherland, Statutory Construction § 6605 (3d ed. 1943); Helvering v. Winmill, 305 U.S. 79 , 59 S.Ct. 45 , 83 L.Ed. 52 (1938). Such deference is paid by the courts, especially when the construction placed upon a statute by the administrative agency is contemporaneous with its enactment; the practice is long standing ; or the agency suggested the legislation subsequently enacted. The rationale for such decisions is thought to be a presumed congressional acquiescence.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Reese v. Dann