In re Bayer Aktiengesellschaft’s Empirical Analysis
488 F.3d 960 · 2007
Citation profile
15 federal appellate · 2 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 29 later decisions — most recently June 2025 · most notably Coach Services, Inc. v. Triumph Learning LLC (2012), In re Becton, Dickinson & Co. (2012)
15 federal appellate · 2 district ·
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
Applies 15 U.S.C. § 1051 (§ 1 of the Trademark Act of 1946 (Lanham Act)) · 15 U.S.C. § 1052 (§ 2 of the Trademark Act of 1946 (Lanham Act)) · 28 U.S.C. § 1295
Relies on Consolidated Edison Co of New York v. National Labor Relations Board · Fuentes v. Shevin · Mishawaka Rubber & Woolen Manufacturing Co. v. S. S. Kresge Co. · United States v. Steffens · Railway Company v. Twombly
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 29 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Where two different conclusions may be warranted based on the evidence of record, the Board's decision to favor one conclusion over the other is the type of decision that must be sustained by this court as supported by substantial evidence.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion.”
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.