Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 465 F.2d 1253 - The Troxel Manufacturing Company, & Cross-Appellant v. Schwinn Bicycle Company, & Cross-Appellee

The Troxel Manufacturing Company, & Cross-Appellant v. Schwinn Bicycle Company, & Cross-Appellee’s Empirical Analysis

465 F.2d 1253 · 1972

Citation profile

72
cited by 72 later decisions
5
states following
January 2013
most recently cited

41 federal appellate · 6 district · 5 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 72 later decisions — most recently January 2013 · most notably Novametrix Medical Systems, Inc. v. BOC Group, Inc. (1992), Panduit Corp. v. Stahlin Bros. Fibre Works (1978)

41 federal appellate · 6 district · 5 state decisions

48019721980199020002010decided

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 Graham v. John Deere Company of Kansas City Calmar Inc · Blonder-Tongue Laboratories, Inc. v. University of Illinois Foundation · Sears, Roebuck & Co. v. Stiffel Co. · Cohens v. Virginia · Lear, Inc. v. Adkins

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

  1. “[S]uch an interpretation of Lear would make it advantageous for a licensee to postpone litigation, enjoy the fruits of his licensing agreement, and sue for repayment of royalties near the end of the term of the patent.”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. ““A licensee may at any time cease royalty payments, secure in the knowledge that the invalidity of the patent may he urged when the licensor sues for unpaid royalties.” 465 F.2d at 1260 .”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “Absent fraud or misconduct, a patentee should not be held responsible for the issuance of an invalid patent.”
    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.