August Technology Corp. v. Camtek, Ltd.’s Empirical Analysis
655 F.3d 1278 · 2011
Citation profile
4 federal appellate · 3 district ·
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1295
Relies on Phillips v. AWH Corp. · Cybor Corporation v. Fas Technologies, Inc., and Fastar Ltd., Defendants-Cross · Kewanee Oil Co. v. Bicron Corp. · Pfaff v. Wells Electronics, Inc. · Aronson v. Quick Point Pencil 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 16 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“A person shall be entitled to a patent unless— (b) the invention was ... on sale in this country, more than one year prior to the date of the application for patent in the United States.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.