523 IP LLC v. CureMD.Com’s Empirical Analysis
2014
Citation profile
1 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 35 U.S.C. § 103 · 35 U.S.C. § 154 · 35 U.S.C. § 271
Relies on Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc. · Kumho Tire Company, Ltd., et al. v. Patrick Carmichael, Etc., et al. · MARKMAN Et Al. v. WESTVIEW INSTRUMENTS, INC., Et Al. · Vitronics Corporation v. Conceptronic Inc · Phillips v. AWH Corp.
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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[c]ourts in this Circuit have stricken extraneous testimony 'where an expert is admitted under Rule 702 and then purports to offer opinions beyond the scope of his expertise.....'”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“explain[] what that experience is or how his expertise grew from it.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. People v. Douglas
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.