Meitzner v. Mindick’s Empirical Analysis
549 F.2d 775 · 1977
Citation profile
How this case has been cited
Cited by 11 later decisions — most recently June 2020
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. § 1912 · 28 U.S.C. § 1913 · 28 U.S.C. § 1926 · 28 U.S.C. § 1927 · 35 U.S.C. § 119 · 35 U.S.C. § 135 · 35 U.S.C. § 285
Relies on Alyeska Pipeline Service Company v. Wilderness Society · F. D. Rich Co. v. United States Ex Rel. Industrial Lumber Co. · Fleischmann Distilling Corp. v. Maier Brewing Co. · International Cellucotton Products Co. v. Coe · Avery v. Chase
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 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[T]his rule works no hardship to him who is diligent in pursuit of his rights. When an interference is declared, the files of his contestants are open to him. He has full cognizance of their disclosures and claims. So advised, it becomes his duty to put forward every claim he has. Rule 109 [ 8 ] affords him this opportunity. If the rule be not enforced or enforceable, then delays and litigation are greatly increased. It is quite obvious that the doctrine of estoppel, as applied in these cases, results in the better conduct of the business of the Patent Office and in the public good.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. In re Baxter
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.