Cutcheon v. Herrick’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

5 federal appellate · 1 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 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““A machine for beating out the soles of boots and shoes, provided with two jacks, two molds, and moans, substantially as described, having provision for automatically moving one jack in one direction while the other is being moved in the opposite direction, whereby the sole of the shoe upon one jack will be under pressure, while the other jack will be in, a convenient position • for the removal of the shoe therefrom.””

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Tripp Giant Leveler Co. v. Rogers · Bresnahan v. Tripp Giant Leveller Co.

2. ““The Gutcheon machine belongs to that type of beating-out machines in which the sole of a shoe is shaped by direct pressure upon all parts of its surface. The last, with the shoe applied to it, is pressed forcibly and directly against a correspondingly shaped mould, and tlieu left standing for a short interval of time, so that the soli; not only assumes the shape of the last and mould, but its shape becomes, so to speak, set or fixed, and is consequently retained. The improvement of Gutcheon consists in organizing, in a machine of this class, two jacks and- two moulds in such a manner that one jack is automatically moved in one direction while the other jack is being moved in the other direction; the effect being that the sole of the shoe on one jack will be under pressure while the shoe on the other jack will be in a convenient position Cor removal. This is clearly described In the first claim of the patent: ‘A machine for beating out the soles of boots and shoes, provided with two jacks, two moulds, and means, substantially as described, having provision for automatically moving one jack in one direction while the other is being moved in the opposite direction, whereby the sole of the shoe upon one jack will be under pressure while the other jack will be in a convenient position for the removal of the shoe therefrom.’ ⅜ ⅞ -• There is nothing in the prior art, as disclosed in this record, which anticipates the Invention of Gutcheon. Its merit is found in the conception of a ”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Tripp Giant Leveller Co. v. Bresnahan

3. ““The result of this brief review of the prior art shows that, previous to the Outcheon patent, the operation of clearing the last from the die had never been done automatically. The essence of the Outcheon invention is that it was the first machine in which both the motions of compressing the last and of clearing the last from the die were performed automatically.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Bresnahan v. Tripp Giant Leveller Co.