In Re Wayne O Johnson’s Empirical Analysis
Citation profile
5 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 15 later decisions — most recently July 2009
5 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 In re Piasecki · In Re Francis Jamc De Blauwe and Frank Ka Selleslags · In re Rinehart · Application of Gene O Sinex · In re Payne
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 15 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“whether [the applicant's] rebuttal evidence is sufficient to persuade the examiner that unexpected results exist is an evidentiary matter left for the trier of fact,”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“must be sufficient to permit a conclusion respecting the relative effectiveness of applicant's claimed compounds and the compounds of the closest prior art,”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. In Re Gary E Geiger“[T]he requirement of unobviousness in the case of chemical inventions is the same as for other types of inventions”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. In Re Hans Oetiker
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.