Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 609 FSUPP2D 1057 - Ormco Corp. v. Align Technology, Inc.

Ormco Corp. v. Align Technology, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis

2009

Citation profile

4
cited by 4 later decisions
July 2013
most recently cited

Relationships

Applies 35 U.S.C. § 271

Relies on Celotex Corporation v. Catrett H · Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio Corporation · Lujan v. National Wildlife Federation · Federal Deposit Insurance v. Meyer · Gustafson v. Alloyd 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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “This court agrees with CNET that Microsoft is instructive for the concept that an electronic catalog, like computer software, is not simply an intangible collection of information, but can also be thought of as having a physical, tangible embodiment once it is expressed and stored on computer readable media in the form of magnetic fields on a hard drive or- etchings on a CD-ROM. The catalog in this case, therefore, is distinguishable from the abstract information at issue in Bayer. The claims in this case are directed toward creation of a product catalog stored on computer readable media, not the identification of whether a particular substance inhibits or does not inhibit a particular protein. In other words, the electronic catalog in this case, far from being abstract infor-mátion or knowledge, is a physical article no different from a product catalog manufactured and assembled on paper bound with stitching, glue or staples. The court holds that the catalog is a “product” within the meaning of section 271(g) which is “made by” CNET’s patented processes.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent

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.