In re Avery’s Empirical Analysis
518 F.2d 1228 · 1975
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 1 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 20 later decisions — most recently August 2012
3 federal appellate · 1 district ·
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. § 103 · 35 U.S.C. § 112
Relies on Application of Virgil W. Vogel and Paul W. Vogel · In re Bergel · In re Sarett · Bergel · In re Pearson
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 20 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“whether one of the claims could be literally infringed without literally infringing the other. If it could be, the claims do not define identically the same invention.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“[n]either reference contains the slightest suggestion to use what it discloses in combination with what is disclosed in the other,”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“[t]he claimed product is completely disclosed in the prior art,”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
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.