Saf-Gard Products, Inc. v. Service Parts, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis
532 F.2d 1266 · 1976
Citation profile
48 federal appellate · 3 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 74 later decisions — most recently September 2012 · most notably Handgards, Inc. v. Ethicon, Inc. (1979), Johannsen v. Pay Less Drug Stores Northwest, Inc. (1990)
48 federal appellate · 3 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 28 U.S.C. § 1292 · 35 U.S.C. § 101 · 35 U.S.C. § 102 · 35 U.S.C. § 282 · 35 U.S.C. § 284
Relies on Graham v. John Deere Company of Kansas City Calmar Inc · Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co. v. Supermarket Equipment Corp. · United States v. Adams · Wingo v. Wedding · Red Ball Motor Freight, Inc. v. Shannon
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 74 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(t)his court has made it clear, moreover, that an invention will not be denied a patent because it embodies a solution which seems simple and obvious with the benefit of hindsight.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““strictly a technical defense. Unless all of the same elements are found in exactly the same situation and united in the same way to perform the identical function” in a single prior art reference “there is no anticipation.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“'(a)lleged art that is cumulative to cited art does not weaken or destroy the presumption of validity. Schnadig v. Gaines Manufacturing Co., 494 F.2d 383 , 391 (6th Cir. 1974).'”
2 later decisions 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.