Pressure Products Medical Supplies, Inc. v. Greatbatch Ltd.’s Empirical Analysis
599 F.3d 1308 · 2010
Citation profile
4 federal appellate · 9 district ·
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1295 · 35 U.S.C. § 112
Relies on Foman v. Davis · MARKMAN Et Al. v. WESTVIEW INSTRUMENTS, INC., Et Al. · Markman v. Westview Instruments, Inc. · Phillips v. AWH Corp. · Cybor Corporation v. Fas Technologies, Inc., and Fastar Ltd., Defendants-Cross
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 28 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“As this court has recognized, district courts may engage in a rolling claim construction, in which the court revisits and alters its interpretation of the claim terms as its understanding of the technology evolves.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“made the adjustment early enough in the trial to give [the harmed party] an opportunity to consider the new construction and adjust its arguments to account for the change”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“a trial judge may learn more about the technology during the trial that necessitates some clarification of claim terms before the jury deliberates”
1 later decision 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.