In re Schnell’s Empirical Analysis
46 F.2d 203 · 1931
Citation profile
1 federal appellate ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 11 later decisions — most recently September 2019
1 federal appellate ·
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 Grant v. Raymond · Graff, Washbourne & Dunn v. Webster · Ashley v. Samuel C. Tatum Co. · Graff, Washbourne & Dunn v. Webster
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 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““ * * * We may dispose of this contention of the solicitor, at this point, by saying that, in view of rulings in certain cases hereinafter referred to, no such uniform practice in the Patent Office in this respect is shown to have prevailed for a very long period of time. * * * ””
3 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. In re Rubinfield · In re Rubinfield“ornament, impression, print, or picture to be applied to an article of manufacture,”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. In re Maatita
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.