Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 538 F.2d 180 - Pfizer, Inc. v. International Rectifier Corp.

Pfizer, Inc. v. International Rectifier Corp.’s Empirical Analysis

538 F.2d 180 · 1976

Citation profile

191
cited by 191 later decisions
9
states following
July 2019
most recently cited

85 federal appellate · 21 district · 10 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 191 later decisions — most recently July 2019 · most notably Krenik v. County of Le Sueur (1995), Ssih Equipment Sa v. United States International Trade Commission (1983)

85 federal appellate · 21 district · 10 state decisions

82019761980199020002010decided

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

Relies on Adickes v. S. H. Kress & Co. · Poller v. Columbia Broadcasting System, Inc. · Beacon Theaters Inc v. C Westover · Societe Internationale Pour Participations Industrielles Et Commerciales, S. A. v. Rogers · Sartor v. Arkansas Natural Gas Corp.

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 191 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “'Summary judgment is notoriously inappropriate for determination of claims in which issues of intent, good faith and other subjective feelings play dominant roles.'”
    11 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “... [T]he standard is not one of strict liability for innocent or even negligent omissions or misstatements before the Patent Office [citing authority]. Rather, to result in refusal to enforce a patent, the misconduct must be accompanied by “some element of wrongfulness, willfulness or bad faith” [citing cases].”
    6 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “most egregious misconduct directed to the court itself”
    6 later decisions 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.