In re Brandt’s Empirical Analysis
64 F.2d 693 · 1933
Citation profile
How this case has been cited
Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently April 1954
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
Relies on Smyth Mfg. Co. v. Sheridan · In re Tucker · In re Tucker
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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Adjustability is usually not a patentable subject-matter unless the adjustability is made in a new and improved way. Making parts adjustable is not invention, if the ordinary ingenuity of a skilled mechanic can accomplish it. In re Tucker and Reeves, 46 F.2d 214 , 18 C.C.P.A, Patents, 875; Smyth Mfg. Co. v. Sheridan, 2 Cir, 149 F. 208 .””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. In re Patzer
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.