In Re Robert C. Sneed and Joseph C. Young, and E-Z Lay Pipe Corp. And Stream Line, Inc., Intervenors’s Empirical Analysis
1983
Citation profile
4 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 16 later decisions — most recently May 2020
4 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 E. I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co. v. Berkley & Co. · In re Prater · Orthopedic Equipment Company Inc v. United States · In re Dien · Douglas v. United States
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.
“because it deals with collapsible hose rather than flexible plastic pipe and teaches that rolling 600 feet of 4 inch, noncollapsible hose into a transportable bundle is virtually 'an insurmountable task' " because "it is not necessary that the inventions of the references be physically combinable to render obvious the invention under review.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“It is axiomatic that, in proceedings before the PTO, claims in an application are to be given their broadest reasonable interpretation consistent with the specification, [ ] and that claim language should be read in light of the specification as it would be interpreted by one of ordinary skill in the art.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. In Re Raymond G Bond“it is not necessary that the inventions of the references be physically combinable to render obvious the invention under review.”
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.