Achates Reference Publishing, Inc. v. Apple Inc.’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

18 federal appellate ·

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.

1. “even if such assessment is reconsidered during the merits phase of proceedings and restated as part of the Board’s final written decision”). 5 .Presumably, Synopsys’s theory is that even if the Board, in a final decision, found the additional claims not invalid, Synopsys could on appeal challenge the finding of non-invalidity of those claims. 6 . Both Synopsys and the PTO argue that the change from the prior reexamination statute supports their respective constructions. The statute stated that if”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Synopsys, Inc. v. Mentor Graphics Corp.

2. “If an inter partes review is instituted and not dismissed under this chapter, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board shall issue a final written decision with respect to the patenta-bility of any patent claimed challenged by the petitioner and any new claim added under section 316(d).”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Synopsys, Inc. v. Mentor Graphics Corp.

3. “An inter partes review may not be instituted if the petition requesting the proceeding is filed more than 1 year after the date on which the petitioner, real party in interest, or privy of the -petitioner is served with a complaint alleging infringement of the patent.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Shaw Industries Group, Inc. v. Automated Creel Systems, Inc.