STC.UNM v. Intel Corp.’s Empirical Analysis
754 F.3d 940 · 2014
Citation profile
4 federal appellate · 2 district ·
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2072 · 35 U.S.C. § 262 · 35 U.S.C. § 281
Relies on United Mine Workers of America v. Gibbs · Amchem Products, Inc. v. Windsor · Provident Tradesmens Bank & Trust Co. v. Patterson · Waterman v. Mackenzie · Independent Wireless Telegraph Co. v. Radio Corp.
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 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“'First, when any patent owner has granted an exclusive license, he stands in a relationship of trust to his licensee' and can be involuntarily joined as a plaintiff in the licensee's infringement suit.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“one co-owner has the right to limit the other co-owner’s ability to sue infringers by refusing to join voluntarily in the patent infringement suit”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“as a matter of substantive patent law, all co-owners must ordinarily consent to join as plaintiffs in an infringement suit”
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.