Boutell v. Volk’s Empirical Analysis
449 F.2d 673 · 1971
Citation profile
19 federal appellate · 2 district ·
Relationships
Applies 35 U.S.C. § 103
Relies on Graham v. John Deere Company of Kansas City Calmar Inc · Blonder-Tongue Laboratories, Inc. v. University of Illinois Foundation · 19 Cal. 2d 807 - Bernhard v. Bank of America National Trust & Saving Association · Julia Hotchkiss Executrix of John Hotchkiss Deceased John Davenport and John Quincy v. Miles Greenwood · Triplett v. Lowell
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 30 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Blonder-Tongue . . . [simply held] that adjudication of invalidity of a patent following a full and fair hearing in which the defender of the patent had an adequate opportunity to present his case in support of validity would be final.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Neither the actual decision of the Supreme Court [in Blonder-Tongue ] nor the language of the opinion suggests that the mutuality requirement is relaxed as to a new infringer following an adjudication of validity. To so hold would deprive the alleged infringer of a trial. Thus, the obvious distinction is that it is not inequitable to relax mutuality in a situation in which the patentee has fired his best shot, so to speak, and has missed. On the other hand, it is grossly inequitable to bind a party to a judgment of validity rendered in an action against some other party.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“Appellant does not argue that Volk was a participant in the Wisconsin case whereby he is on this account precluded from again litigating, for it is obvious that Volk was not a party directly or indirectly in the Wisconsin litigation. Instead, he contends that Blonder-Tongue has eliminated all need for privity in a patent case. This is a grossly inaccurate appraisal. [Emphasis added.]”
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.