Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 496 U.S. 661 - Eli Lilly & Co. v. Medtronic, Inc.

Eli Lilly & Co. v. Medtronic, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis

1990

Citation profile

470
cited by 470 later decisions
11
cited 11 times by the Supreme Court
2
states following
June 2026
most recently cited

127 federal appellate · 139 district · 3 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 470 later decisions (11 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 2026 · most notably Joy Technologies, Inc. v. Flakt, Inc. (1993), Glaxo, Inc. v. Novopharm, Ltd. (1997)

127 federal appellate · 139 district · 3 state decisions

21101990200020102020decided

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.

Appellate journey

reviewedRoche Products, Inc. v. Bolar Pharmaceutical Co. (from Federal Circuit Court of Appeals)

Relationships

Applies 1 U.S.C. § 106A · 21 U.S.C. § 151 · 21 U.S.C. § 341 (Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 350A (Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 355 (Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 360B (Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act) · 21 U.S.C. § 360E (Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act) · 28 U.S.C. § 1338

Relies on Holmes v. United States · Brendale v. Confederated Tribes & Bands of the Yakima Indian Nation · Cochran v. United States · Eli Lilly & Co. v. Medtronic, Inc. · Pittston Coal Group v. Sebben

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

  1. “if the purpose of such submission is to obtain approval under such Act.”
    15 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “act of infringement that consists of submitting an ANDA ... containing the fourth type of certification”
    8 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “(I) that [the required] patent information has not been filed [with the FDA], (II) that such patent has expired, (III) of the date on which such patent will expire, or (IV) that such patent is invalid or will not be infringed by the manufacture, use, or sale of the' new drug for which the application is submitted.”
    7 later decisions 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.