Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 82 F.2d 197 - Collins v. Emerson

Collins v. Emerson’s Empirical Analysis

82 F.2d 197 · 1936

Citation profile

5
cited by 5 later decisions
January 1960
most recently cited

4 federal appellate · 1 district ·

Relationships

Applies 35 U.S.C. § 31

Relies on Tashjian v. Forderer Cornice Works

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.

  1. “• “Of the five claims (1, 3, 4, 5, and 7) relied upon in the second patent, the plaintiffs state that claim 4 is sufficiently illustrative. This claim reads as follows: “ ‘4.' In an apparatus for producing artificial respiration, a casing to receive the body of the patient, an opening in one wall thereof through which the head of the patient projects, means to produce periodic variations in pressure within said casing and means to provide a seal for said opening comprising a stretchable rubber collar adapted to fit around the patient’s neck and be clamped to the wall of said casing, and clamp means at a plurality of points around the opening in said casing wall to clamp said collar in adjusted and stretched position.’ * * * “The other claims in issue are of the same general character as claim 4, except that they are not limited to ‘clamping means at a plurality of points around the opening.’ They all relate to a stretchable, adjustable collar and the means of clamping it to the end wall of the casing and adjusting the opening of the collar comfortably around the patient’s neck and relative to the opening in the casing wall. * * * The question of novelty and patentability in these claims resides in the character of the rubber collar disclosed when used in conjunction with a clamping means having a plurality of clamps likewise disclosed, whereby a collar, having a relatively small opening, may be adjusted to the size of the neck of the patient and also eccentric of the opening ”
    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.