Fleming v. Escort Inc.’s Empirical Analysis
774 F.3d 1371 · 2014
Citation profile
10 federal appellate · 2 district ·
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1295 · 35 U.S.C. § 102 · 35 U.S.C. § 251
Relies on Pierce v. Underwood · Landes Construction Co. v. Royal Bank of Canada · Woodland Trust v. Flowertree Nursery, Inc. · Cooper v. Goldfarb · Sandt Technology Ltd v. Resco Metal and Plastics Corporation Seven Ocean Enterprises Inc
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 19 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Fleming is correct that none of the corroborating evidence constitutes definitive proof of Orr’s account or discloses each claim limitation as written. But the corroboration requirement has never been so demanding. It is a flexible, rule-of-reason demand for independent evidence that, as a whole, makes credible the testimony of the purported prior inventor with regard to conception and reduction to practice of the invention as claimed.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“whereby all pertinent evidence is examined in order to determine whether the inventor's story is credible.”
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.