Pfizer, Inc. v. Lee’s Empirical Analysis
811 F.3d 466 · 2016
Citation profile
2 federal appellate ·
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1295 · 35 U.S.C. § 121 · 35 U.S.C. § 154 · 5 U.S.C. § 706
Relies on Yee v. City of Escondido · Nelson v. Adams USA, Inc. · Centech Group, Inc. v. United States · Gerber Garment Technology, Inc. v. Lectra Systems, Inc. · In re Hughes
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 5 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(i) a so-called “A-Delay,” pursuant to § 154(b)(1)(A), “awarding] PTA for delays arising from the [PTO’s] failure to act by certain examination deadlines”; (ii) a so-called “B-Delay,” pursuant to § 154(b)(1)(B), “awarding] PTA for an application pendency exceeding three years”; and (iii) a so-called “C-Delay,” pursuant to § 154(b)(1)(C), “award[ing] PTA for delays due to interferences, secrecy orders, and appeals,””
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.