In re Kubin’s Empirical Analysis
561 F.3d 1351 · 2009
Citation profile
31 federal appellate · 14 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 91 later decisions — most recently April 2023 · most notably Eurand, Inc. v. Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc. (2012), Wyers v. Master Lock Co. (2010)
31 federal appellate · 14 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. § 1295 · 35 U.S.C. § 103 · 35 U.S.C. § 112 · 35 U.S.C. § 141
Relies on Graham v. John Deere Company of Kansas City Calmar Inc · KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc. · In re Gartside · General Electric Co. v. Jewel Incandescent Lamp Co. · In re Sinex
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 91 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“vary[ing] all parameters or try[ing] each of numerous possible choices until one possibly arrived at a successful result, where the prior art gave either no indication of which parameters were critical or no direction as to which of many possible choices is likely to be successful.”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Obviousness is a question of law based on underlying findings of fact.”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“When there is a design need or market pressure to solve a problem and there are a finite number of identified, predictable solutions, a person of ordinary skill has good reason to pursue the known options within his or her technical grasp. If this leads to the anticipated success, it is likely the product not of innovation but of ordinary skill and common sense. In that instance the fact that a combination was obvious to try might show that it was obvious under § 103.”
4 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.