In re Albrecht’s Empirical Analysis
514 F.2d 1385 · 1975
Citation profile
How this case has been cited
Cited by 9 later decisions — most recently November 1990
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. § 103 · 35 U.S.C. § 112
Relies on Wingo v. Wedding · In re Sinex · In re Ghiron · In re Davies · In re Albrecht
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 9 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“There seems to be little doubt that the Patent and Trademark Office would not have entertained such a comparison if initiated by appellants because they have no support in their specification for use of the claimed compounds as anesthetics. See In re Davies, 475 F.2d 667 , 177 USPQ 381 (CCPA 1973).”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. In re Dillon
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.