Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 617 F.2d 261 - In re Zahn

In re Zahn’s Empirical Analysis

617 F.2d 261 · 1980

Citation profile

19
cited by 19 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
August 2018
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 3 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 19 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently August 2018

2 federal appellate · 3 district ·

601980199020002010decided

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. § 103 · 35 U.S.C. § 112 · 35 U.S.C. § 171

Relies on Gorham Company v. White · Smith v. Whitman Saddle Co. · In re Rubinfield · In re Laverne · In re Stevens

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

  1. “Section 171 authorizes patents on ornamental designs for articles of manufacture. While the design must be embodied in some articles, the statute is not limited to designs for complete articles, or 'discrete' articles, and certainly not to articles separately sold ...”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “Section 171 authorizes patents on ornamental designs for articles of manufacture. While the design must be embodied in some articles, the statute is not limited to designs for complete articles, or “discrete” articles .... No sound authority has been cited for any limitation on how a design is to be embodied in an article of manufacture. Here the design is embodied in the shank portion of a drill and a drill is unquestionably an article of manufacture. It is thus applied design as distinguished from abstract design.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “There is a distinction to be obsérved between parts of the total article illustrated, in which a new design is embodied, and parts of that article which embody none of the design.”
    1 later decision 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.