Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 48 F.2d 958 - In re Rundell

In re Rundell’s Empirical Analysis

48 F.2d 958 · 1931

Citation profile

22
cited by 22 later decisions
December 1959
most recently cited

How this case has been cited

Cited by 22 later decisions — most recently December 1959

150193119401950decided

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 Missouri Pacific Railway Co. v. Chicago & Alton Railroad · Marchand v. Emken · In re GILL · In re Gill

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

  1. ““The mere statement that a device is to be operated automatically instead of by hand, without a claim specifying any particular automatic mechanism, is not the statement of an invention.””
    4 later decisions 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.