Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 557 F.2d 812 - In re Voss

In re Voss’s Empirical Analysis

557 F.2d 812 · 1977

Citation profile

12
cited by 12 later decisions
April 2011
most recently cited

1 federal appellate · 3 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 12 later decisions — most recently April 2011

1 federal appellate · 3 district ·

5019771980199020002010decided

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 35 U.S.C. § 102 · 35 U.S.C. § 112 · 35 U.S.C. § 120 · 35 U.S.C. § 134 · 35 U.S.C. § 141 · 35 U.S.C. § 7 (§ 8 of the Patent Act of 1952)

Relies on In re Wertheim · Application of Joseph D. Fisher · In re Smythe · In re Smith · In re Lund

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

  1. “A glass-ceramic material is originally formed as a glass which is then phase separated, by a controlled uniform devi-trification throughout, to develop a fine crystalline structure -within a glassy matrix, the material thus produced having physical properties materially different from the parent glass and more nearly characteristic of a conventional crystalline ceramic material. Reference is made to United States Patent No. 2,920,972, granted to S.D. Stookey, for a general discussion of glass-ceramic material and their production.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “[I]t is clear from the quotation from In re Fisher, 427 F.2d 833 , 838, 57 CCPA 1099 , 1106, 166 USPQ 18 , 23 (1970), set forth in [footnote 6 of In re Glass, 492 F.2d 1228 , 1232 (CCPA 1974),] that the PTO can rely on such later-issued patents and publications only if a showing is made that such claim language is the “language of the present art” as of the filing date of the application in question.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “Copending application Ser. No. 131,108, filed Aug. 14, 1961 by Jack Hurst and Harry D. Anspon describes the preparation of aqueous dispersions of water-insoluble, self-emulsifiable ethylene polymers containing pendent carboxy-late salt groups .which can be suitably employed in the process of this invention. As described therein, water-insoluble, but -self-emulsifiable ethylene polymers containing pendent carboxy-late salt groups are prepared by the hydrolysis in an aqueous medium of the acrylate groups of a thermoplastic ethylene-alkyl acrylate inter-polymer employing elevated temperatures, a metallic base, and, optionally, a nitrogenous base to produce a stable aqueous dispersion of the ethylene polymer. Reference is made to application Ser. No. 131,108 for complete descriptions of methods of preparing aqueous polymeric dispersions applicable in the hereinafter described invention.”
    1 later decision 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.