Wahl v. Vibranetics, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis
474 F.2d 971 · 1973
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 2 district ·
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1391 · 28 U.S.C. § 1400
Relies on Graham v. John Deere Company of Kansas City Calmar Inc · Poller v. Columbia Broadcasting System, Inc. · Blonder-Tongue Laboratories, Inc. v. University of Illinois Foundation · Triplett v. Lowell · United States v. Parker
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 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““It is apparent from these quotations that there must be something more than proof of existence of prior litigation of the same patent, resulting in an adjudication of infringement, before a patentee may be foreclosed from trial of a subsequent action involving the same patent. Under the principles announced, necessarily, there must be a balancing of the equities on a case by case basis.” 474 F.2d, at 974 . [Emphasis in original.]”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“keenly aware of the issues for decision.”
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.