Ca, Inc. v. Simple. Com, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis
2009
Citation profile
1 district ·
Relationships
Applies 17 U.S.C. § 410 (§ 101 of the Copyright Act of 1976) · 35 U.S.C. § 102 · 35 U.S.C. § 103 · 35 U.S.C. § 112
Relies on Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc. · Celotex Corporation v. Catrett H · Thomas v. Arn · Graham v. John Deere Company of Kansas City Calmar Inc · Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co. v. Supermarket Equipment 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 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“As a dependent claim contains at least one more limitation than the independent claim upon which it depends, it cannot be invalid under § 102 ... if the independent claim upon which it depends is not anticipated.”
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.