Holdwire, Ltd. v. United States’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

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

1. “* * *, in view of the statutory language “commonly used,” the burden of the plaintiff was not so great as that assumed by a party having to establish chief use. “The fact of chief use is difficult to prove. It ordinarily entails rather exacting evidence of use throughout the United States and cannot depend upon evidence of use locally.” L. Tobert Co., Inc., and American Shipping Co. v. United States, 28 Cust. Ct. 456 , Abstract 56581, affirmed, 41 C.C.P.A. (Customs) 161, C.A.D. 544. Common use implies “only a use which is not infrequent and which is common to everyday observation, but which, nevertheless, may not be the chief use of such an article.” United States v. Mac-Naughton, 5 Ct. Cust. Appls. 114 , T.D. 34166.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Balfour, Guthrie & Co. v. United States

2. “1. A large bundle or package of goods for storage or transportation; now, specif., a large closely pressed package of merchandise bound with cord, wire, or hoops, and usually protected by a wrapping, as of burlap. * * *”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Balfour, Guthrie & Co. v. United States