Echostar Communications Corporation Dbs Pc’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

5 federal appellate · 10 district · 7 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 81 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “[W]hen an alleged infringer asserts its advice-of-counsel defense regarding willful infringement of a particular patent, it waives its immunity for any document or opinion that embodies or discusses a communication to or from it concerning whether that patent is valid, enforceable, and infringed by the accused. This waiver of both the attorney-client privilege and the work-product immunity includes not only any letters, memorandum, conversation, or the like between the attorney and his or her client, but also includes, when appropriate, any documents referencing a communication between attorney and client.”

   6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 439 F. Supp. 2d 46 - Intex Recreation Corp. v. Team Worldwide Corp. · 490 F. Supp. 2d 681 - Lifenet, Inc. v. Musculoskeletal Transplant Foundation, Inc.

2. “(A) Documents and Tangible Things. Ordinarily, a party may not discover documents and tangible things that are prepared in anticipation of litigation or for trial by or for another party or its representative (including the other party’s attorney, consultant, surety, in-demnitor, insurer, or agent). But subject to RCFC 26(b)(4), those materials may be discovered if: (i) they are otherwise discoverable under RCFC 26(b)(1); and (ii) the party shows that it has substantial need for the materials to prepare its case and cannot, without undue hardship, obtain then* substantial equivalent by other means. (B) Protection Against Disclosure. If the ■ court orders discovery of those materials, it must protect against disclosure of the mental impressions, conclusions, opinions, or legal theories of a party’s attorney or other representative concerning the litigation.”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Jicarilla Apache Nation v. United States · Davita Healthcare Partners, Inc. v. United States

3. “thorough enough, as combined with other factors, to instill a belief in the in-fringer that a court might reasonably hold the patent is invalid, not infringed, or unenforceable. It is what the alleged infringer knew or believed, and by contradistinction not what other items counsel may have prepared but did not communicate to the client, that informs the court of an infringer’s willfulness. The overarching goal of waiver in such a case is to prevent a party from using the advice he received as both a sword, by waiving privilege to favorable advice, and a shield, by asserting privilege to unfavorable advice.”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. In re Knearl · 490 F. Supp. 2d 681 - Lifenet, Inc. v. Musculoskeletal Transplant Foundation, Inc.