In Re Convertible Rowing Exerciser Patent Litigation’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 district ·

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 3 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “[T]he ultimate issue of the fairness of competition raised by section 337, necessitate^] that the Commission review the validity and enforceability of patents, for the purposes of section 337.... The Commission is not, of course, empowered under existing law to set aside a patent as being invalid or to render it unenforceable, and the extent of the Commission’s authority under this bill is to take into consideration such defenses and to make findings thereon for the purposes of determining whether section 337 is being violated.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. In Re Convertible Rowing Exerciser Patent Litigation · 727 F. Supp. 202 - Baltimore Luggage Co. v. Samsonite Corp.

2. “Unfair methods of competition and unfair acts in the importation of articles into the United States, or in their sale by the owner, importer, consignee, or agent of either, the effect or tendency of which is to destroy or substantially injure an industry, efficiently and economically operated, in the United States, or to prevent the establishment of such an industry, or to restrain or monopolize trade and commerce in the United States, are declared unlawful, and when found by the commission to exist shall be dealt with, in addition to any other provisions of law, as provided in this section.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 727 F. Supp. 202 - Baltimore Luggage Co. v. Samsonite Corp.