In Re Paul Chu, William Downs, John B. Doyle and Peter v. Smith’s Empirical Analysis
1995
Citation profile
5 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 9 later decisions — most recently March 2019
5 district ·
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 Lockheed Shipbuilding Co. v. Director, Office of Workers' Compensation Programs · Insurance Co. of Pennsylvania v. Ben Cooper, Inc. · County of Yakima v. Confederated Tribes & Bands of the Yakima Indian Nation · V-1 Oil Co. v. Gerber · Litton Systems, Inc. v. Whirlpool Corp.
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 9 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“entitled to the benefit of an earlier filed application only if the disclosure of the earlier application provides support for the claims ... as required by 35 U.S.C. § 112 .”
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.