Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 568 F.2d 1357 - In re Bayer

In re Bayer’s Empirical Analysis

568 F.2d 1357 · 1978

Citation profile

46
cited by 46 later decisions
February 2021
most recently cited

10 federal appellate · 9 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 46 later decisions — most recently February 2021 · most notably Stratoflex, Inc. v. Aeroquip Corp. (1983), Carella v. Starlight Archery & Pro Line Co. (1986)

10 federal appellate · 9 district ·

180197819801990200020102020decided

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. § 103

Relies on Sinclair & Carroll Co. v. Interchemical Corp. · Alexander Milburn Co. v. Davis-Bournonville Co. · Parker v. Citizens Committee for the Hudson Valley · Garrett Corp. v. United States · Buggs v. Ford Motor Co.

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

  1. “[S]ince appellant's thesis could have been located in the university library only by one having been informed of its existence by the faculty committee, and not by means of the customary research aids available in the library, the 'probability of public knowledge of the contents of the [thesis],' was virtually nil.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. ““A person shall be entitled to a patent unless- (b) the invention was patented or described in a printed publication in this or a foreign country ... more than one year prior to the date of the application for patent in the United States .... ””
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “[A] printed document may qualify as a `publication' under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) ... so long as accessibility is sufficient to raise a presumption that the public concerned with the art would know of the invention.”
    2 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.