Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 789 F.3d 1292 - Microsoft Corp. v. Proxyconn, Inc.

Microsoft Corp. v. Proxyconn, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis

789 F.3d 1292 · 2015

Citation profile

69
cited by 69 later decisions
March 2020
most recently cited

40 federal appellate ·

Relationships

Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1295 · 35 U.S.C. § 102 · 35 U.S.C. § 103 · 35 U.S.C. § 316 · 5 U.S.C. § 706

Relies on Securities and Exchange Commission v. Chenery Corporation Same · Auer v. Robbins · National Labor Relations Board v. Bell Aerospace Co. · Phillips v. AWH Corp. · In re Gartside

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

  1. “[e]ven under the [BRI], the [PTAB's] construction cannot be divorced from the specification and the record evidence ... and must be consistent with the one that those skilled in the art would reach.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[W]e review the Board's ultimate claim constructions de novo and its underlying factual determinations involving extrinsic evidence for substantial evidence.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “During IPRs, once the PTO grants a patentee’s motion to amend, the substituted claims are not subject to further examination. Moreover, the petitioner may choose not to challenge the patenta-bility of substitute claims if, for example, the amendments narrowed the claims such that the petitioner no longer faces a risk of infringement. If the patentee were not required to establish patenta-bility of substitute claims over the prior art of record, an amended patent could issue despite the PTO having before it prior art that undermines patentability.”
    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.