Optium Corp. v. Emcore Corp.’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

1 federal appellate · 4 district ·

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

1. “At this second stage ... the question is no longer whether materiality and/or intent to deceive were proven with evidence that is sufficiently clear and convincing. While the facts of materiality and intent to deceive must be proven by clear and convincing evidence, the district court must balance the substance of those now-proven facts and all the equities of the case to determine whether the severe penalty of unenforceability should be imposed. It is this balancing that is committed to the district court’s discretion.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Volterra Semiconductor Corp. v. Primarion, Inc.

2. “In situations of nondisclosure of information rather than affirmative misrepresentation, 'clear and convincing evidence must show that the applicant made a deliberate decision to withhold a known material reference.'”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Exergen Corp. v. Brooklands Inc.

3. “factual basis for a finding of deceptive intent.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Sunoco Partners Mktg. v. U.S. Venture, Inc.