Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 752 F.2d 1538 - Lemelson v. United States

Lemelson v. United States’s Empirical Analysis

752 F.2d 1538 · 1985

Citation profile

224
cited by 224 later decisions
2
states following
September 2017
most recently cited

18 federal appellate · 41 district · 2 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 224 later decisions — most recently September 2017 · most notably Novametrix Medical Systems, Inc. v. BOC Group, Inc. (1992), Markman v. Westview Instruments, Inc. (1995)

18 federal appellate · 41 district · 2 state decisions

9501985199020002010decided

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

Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1498 · 35 U.S.C. § 271 · 35 U.S.C. § 287

Relies on Graver Tank & Mfg. Co. v. Linde Air Products Co. · Hannahville Indian Community v. United States · Cochran v. United States · Tisdale v. United States · Smith v. Snow

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

  1. “It is ... well settled that each element of a claim is material and essential, and that in order for a court to find infringement, the plaintiff must show the presence of every element or its substantial equivalent in the accused device.”
    8 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “(a) Whenever an invention described in and covered by a patent of the United States is used or manufactured by or for the United States without license of the owner thereof or lawful right to use or manufacture the same, the owner’s remedy shall be by action against the United States in the United States Claims Court for the recovery of his reasonable and entire compensation for such use and manufacture.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “[v]iewing the invention as a whole, Microdot's capped wheel nut 'performs substantially the same function in substantially the same way.'”
    2 later decisions 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.