Ormco Corp. v. Align Technology, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

18 federal appellate · 6 district ·

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

1. “(1) the quantity of experimentation necessary, (2) the amount of direction or guidance presented, (3) the presence or absence of working examples, (4) the nature of the invention, (5) the state of the prior art, (6) the relative skill of those in the art, (7) the predictability or unpredictability of the art, and (8) the breadth of the claims.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 648 F. Supp. 2d 1294 - Johnson & Johnson Vision Care, Inc. v. Ciba Vision Corp.

2. “When the application of prosecution disclaimer involves statements from prosecution of a familial patent relating to the same subject matter as the claim language at issue in the patent being construed, those statements in the familial application are relevant in construing the claims at issue.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co. v. Unifrax I LLC

3. “while all those statements by the inventors in the specification of the Ormco patents, standing alone, may not be conclusive in showing that the claims require completely automatic determination of final tooth positions, those in the prosecution history make it even clearer.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co. v. Unifrax I LLC