Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 758 F.3d 1344 - Digitech Image Technologies, LLC v. Electronics for Imaging, Inc.

Digitech Image Technologies, LLC v. Electronics for Imaging, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis

758 F.3d 1344 · 2014

Citation profile

57
cited by 57 later decisions
April 2025
most recently cited

13 federal appellate · 7 district ·

Relationships

Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1295 · 35 U.S.C. § 101

Relies on Diamond v. Diehr · Gottschalk v. Benson · Diamond v. Chakrabarty · Parker v. Flook · Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank Int'l

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

  1. “[W]ithout additional limitations, a process that employs mathematical algorithms to manipulate existing information to generate additional information is not patent eligible.”
    7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[[Image here]] in which the first term on the right side is the "value of parity bit j-1” and the second term on the right side is the "value of a sum of 'a' randomly chosen irregular repeats of the message bits.” . Courts should not view software as abstract simply because it exists in an intangible form. It is as fruitless to say that a human could use pencil and paper to perform the same calculations as a computer, as it is to say that a human could use p,encil and paper to write down the chemical structure of a DNA strand. In either case, any effort on the part of a human will only be a symbolic representation. The effort will not produce the same effect as executing a computer program or isolating a DNA strand. . To understand this concept, imagine a check node has the value O. It is connected to three information bits, all with the value 1. It is connected to two parity bits, one with the value 1 and one with a value to be determined. Let us call the value of the undeter mined pdrity bit y. To solve for y, the encoder would use the following formula: 0=1 + 14-1 + 1 +y. Using mod-2 addition, the encoder would determine that the value of y is O. . The method claim at issue in Digitech recited: A method of generating a device profile that describes properties of a device in a digital image reproduction system for capturing, transforming or rendering an image, said method comprising: generating first data for describing a device dependent transformation of color information”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “a process of combining two data sets into a device profile”
    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.