In re Procter & Gamble Co.’s Empirical Analysis
749 F.3d 1376 · 2014
Citation profile
7 federal appellate ·
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1651 · 35 U.S.C. § 314 · 35 U.S.C. § 315
Relies on Kerr v. United States Dist. Court for Northern Dist. of Cal. · Mallard v. United States Dist. Court for Southern Dist. of Iowa · Cheney v. United States District Court for District of Columbia · St. Jude Medical, Cardiology Division, Inc. v. Volcano Corp. · In re Dominion Dealer Solutions, LLC.
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 a separate question whether section 314(d) means that the decision to institute the review is unchallengeable later — if the Board reaches a decision under section 318(a) and an appeal is taken under section 319 [appeal to this court of the final written decision of the PTAB], Perhaps section 314(d)’s broad language precludes all judicial review of the institution decision, even in an eventual section 319 appeal. We need not decide that question, which can be addressed in a section 319 appeal. Nor need we address whether an immediate challenge could be brought in district court [through an APA action].”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“drastic [remedy], to be invoked only in extraordinary situations.”
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.