In re Swett’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

4 federal appellate · 2 district ·

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

1. “We note that appellant’s utility patent issued July 9, 1968 and that, because of the delays involved in appealing to this court, there would be an extension of monopoly if obviousness-type double patenting is adjudged to exist and if appellant, pursuant to 35 USC 173 and Rule 155, elects a fourteen-year term. In such an event, we think appellant could file a terminal disclaimer to overcome the “obviousness-type” double patenting rejection.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. In re Deters

2. “not easy to compare utility word claims with design picture claims in determining if the 'same invention' is being claimed.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Ropat Corp. v. McGraw-Edison Co.