Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 646 F.2d 527 - In re Wertheim

In re Wertheim’s Empirical Analysis

646 F.2d 527 · 1981

Citation profile

19
cited by 19 later decisions
March 2023
most recently cited

5 federal appellate · 2 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 19 later decisions — most recently March 2023

5 federal appellate · 2 district ·

8019811990200020102020decided

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. § 102 · 35 U.S.C. § 103 · 35 U.S.C. § 120

Relies on Alexander Milburn Co. v. Davis-Bournonville Co. · Hazeltine Research, Inc. v. Brenner · In re Wertheim · In re Bowers · In re Lund

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. “constitute[ ] a full, clear, concise and exact description ... of the invention claimed”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “may be said to contain subject matter AB, B representing new matter,” and a fur ther continuation-in-part application”
    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.