In re Langer’s Empirical Analysis
503 F.2d 1380 · 1974
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 18 later decisions — most recently July 2011
2 federal appellate · 1 state decisions
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 35 U.S.C. § 101 · 35 U.S.C. § 112
Relies on In re Marzocchi · In re Bergel · In re Cook · In re Citron · Land v. Regan
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 18 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[A] specification which contains a disclosure of utility which corresponds in scope to the subject matter sought to be patented m,ust be taken as sufficient to satisfy the utility requirement of § 101 for the entire claimed subject matter unless there is reason for one skilled in the art to question the objective truth of the statement of utility or its scope.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title. [Emphasis ours.]”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. In re Watson
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.