Burson v. Carmichael’s Empirical Analysis
731 F.2d 849 · 1984
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 1 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 12 later decisions — most recently December 2011
2 federal appellate · 1 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 Barrett v. United States · Robert A. Reiners v. Charles L. Mehltretter · Silvestri v. Grant · Loy W. Sockman and Elliott W. Brady v. Robert C. Switzer and Richard A. Ward · Snitzer v. Etzel
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 12 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“It is Mayer, the copier of claims from Martin’s patent, who has the burden of proving, by clear and convincing evidence, that “the disclosure on which he relies supports the copied claims which became the interference -counts.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Kubota v. Shibuya · Martin v. Mayer““With a full opportunity to introduce all evidence available to him, Carmichael chose to rely upon the supposed weakness of Burson’s case rather than the strength of his own. That approach having failed, he wants to start over by introducing evidence he says he could have earlier introduced. There is no support in law for repeated bites at the apple. On the contrary, the law whenever possible reaches for repose.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage
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.