In re Adler’s Empirical Analysis
723 F.3d 1322 · 2013
Citation profile
4 federal appellate ·
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1295 · 35 U.S.C. § 103
Relies on Consolidated Edison Co of New York v. National Labor Relations Board · Graham v. John Deere Company of Kansas City Calmar Inc · KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc. · In re Gartside · Procter & Gamble Co. v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc.
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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“finds facts not found by the examiner regarding the differences between the prior art and the claimed invention, and these facts are the principal evidence upon which the Board's rejection was based.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“[T]he ultimate criterion of whether a rejection is considered 'new' in a decision by the [B]oard is whether [applicants] have had fair opportunity to react to the thrust of the rejection.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“[b]ecause [appellant] had the opportunity to respond, and in fact did respond, to the thrust of the examiner's basis for rejecting the claims”
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.