Brenner v. United States’s Empirical Analysis
773 F.2d 306 · 1985
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 10 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 47 later decisions — most recently September 2004 · most notably Avia Group International, Inc. v. L.A. Gear California, Inc. (1988), Wilson Sporting Goods Co. v. David Geoffrey & Associates (1990)
1 federal appellate · 10 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 Barmag Barmer Maschinenfabrik AG v. Murata Machinery, Ltd. · Hughes Aircraft Company v. United States · Builders Concrete, Inc. v. Bremerton Concrete Products Co. · Kinzenbaw v. Deere & Co.
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 47 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“and a prosecution history estoppel makes clear that no actual infringement under the doctrine of equivalents can be found.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage“'[s]ummary judgment is as appropriate in a patent case as in any other' where no genuine issue of material fact is present and the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“where the claims do not 'read on' the accused structure”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
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.