In re Brown’s Empirical Analysis
459 F.2d 531 · 1972
Citation profile
5 federal appellate · 2 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 30 later decisions — most recently February 2016 · most notably Scripps Clinic & Research Foundation v. Genentech, Inc. (1991), SmithKline Beecham Corp. v. Apotex Corp. (2006)
5 federal appellate · 2 district ·
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
Applies 35 U.S.C. § 102 · 35 U.S.C. § 103 · 35 U.S.C. § 112
Relies on Cochrane v. Badische Anilin & Soda Fabrik · In re Pilkington · In re Steppan
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.
“* * * the lack of physical description in a product-by-process claim makes determination of the patenta-bility of the claim more difficult, since in spite of the fact that the claim may recite only process limitations, it is the patentability of the product claimed and not of the recited process steps which must be established. We are therefore of the opinion that when the prior art discloses a product which reasonably appears to be either identical with or only slightly different than a product claimed in a product-by-process claim, a rejection based alternatively on either section 102 or section 103 of the statute is eminently fair and acceptable. As a practical matter, the Patent Office is not equipped to manufacture products by the myriad of processes put before it and then obtain prior art products and make physical comparisons therewith. [Emphasis in the original.]”
4 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. In re Fessmann · In re Hirao“particularly point out and distinctly claim”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
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.