715 F. Supp. 2d 56 - Cornish v. Dudas’s Empirical Analysis
2010
Citation profile
17 district ·
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 1905 · 20 U.S.C. § 1400 (Education for All Handicapped Children Act of 1975) · 29 U.S.C. § 626 (§ 7 of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967) · 29 U.S.C. § 705 · 29 U.S.C. § 794 · 35 U.S.C. § 2 · 35 U.S.C. § 32 · 38 U.S.C. § 5701
Relies on Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly · Ashcroft v. Iqbal · Chevron U. S. A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. · Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife · Katz 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 19 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“However, the USPTO denied the request based on Cornish’s failure to present sufficient evidence of his ability to render patent applicants valuable service or, in the alternative, to pass the patent examination. Cornish took and failed the patent examinations administered in July of 2005, 2006, and 2007, though the USPTO’s Office of Enrollment Discipline (“OED”) had granted all of his requests to make reasonable accommodations for him to take the exams. He also sat for and failed the 2008 patent exam, during which he received the reasonable medical accommodations for which he had provided sufficient medical documentation establishing a need.”
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.