In Re Arbitration Between Interdigital Communications Corp.’s Empirical Analysis
2007
Citation profile
3 district ·
Relationships
Applies 9 U.S.C. § 10 (Federal Arbitration Act) · 9 U.S.C. § 201 · 9 U.S.C. § 207
Relies on Landis v. North American Co. · Dh Blair Co Inc Dh v. Gottdiener Dh J · Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner & Smith, Inc. v. Bobker · Jenkins v. City of New York · DiRussa v. Dean Witter Reynolds Inc.
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.
“It is clear that Samsung's 'refusal to consider' argument essentially seeks vacatur on the ground that the Panel failed to consider the Nokia Evidence in the precise manner desired by Samsung.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“refusal to properly consider rather than their outright refusal to hear [evidence] justifies vácatur” as contrary to § 10(a)(3)). Moreover,”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.