Williamson v. Citrix Online, LLC’s Empirical Analysis
792 F.3d 1339 · 2015
Citation profile
19 federal appellate · 9 district ·
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1295 · 35 U.S.C. § 1 (American Inventors Protection Act of 1999) · 35 U.S.C. § 112
Relies on Warner-Jenkinson Company Inc v. Hilton Davis Chemical Co · Pegram v. Herdrich · Phillips v. AWH Corp. · Hughes Aircraft Co. v. Jacobson · Estate of Cowart v. Nicklos Drilling 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 59 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“function without reciting sufficient structure for performing that function.”
12 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“the words of the claim are understood by persons of ordinary skill in the art to have sufficiently definite meaning as the name for structure”
6 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.