Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 446 F.3d 643 - No. 05-3472

No. 05-3472’s Empirical Analysis

2006

Citation profile

16
cited by 16 later decisions
April 2025
most recently cited

2 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 16 later decisions — most recently April 2025

2 district ·

80200620102020decided

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 Phillips Petroleum Co. v. Shutts · Charles Dowd Box Co. v. Courtney · Rauch v. Day & Night Manufacturing Corp. · Moses v. Business Card Express, Inc. · Varsic v. United States District Court for the Central District of California

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

  1. “On this record, we are unable to ascertain whether the conduct alleged by the plaintiffs “aris[es] out of the same ... series of transactions or occurrences,” as required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 20(a) or, if not, whether the division and the possible transfer pursuant to § 1404(a) of the respective cases would be more appropriate. Furthermore, we cannot review the district court’s weighing of the applicable factors in these determinations, because the record is devoid of the necessary analysis. Accordingly, we conclude that, based on the existing record, the district court also erred in its resolution of this issue.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “in ruling on a motion to transfer under § 1404(a), a district court should consider the private interests of the parties, including their convenience and the convenience of potential witnesses, as well as other public-interest concerns, such as systemic integrity and fairness, which come under the rubric of 'interests of justice.'”
    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.