In Re Edgar L Stencel’s Empirical Analysis
Citation profile
8 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 21 later decisions — most recently June 2013
8 district ·
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Relies on Lister v. United States · Cochran v. United States · Perkin-Elmer Corporation v. Computervision Corporation · Kropa v. Robie · Interconnect Planning Corp. v. Feil
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 21 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“1. A driver for setting a joint of a threaded collar, a threaded pin, and at least one sheet, the collar having plasti-cally deformable lobes on its longitudinal exterior that upon the existence of a predetermined clamp-up load between the collar and the sheets plastically deform in radial compression and displace material of the collar into void volumes between the collar and the pin to lock the two together and terminate the action of the driver on the collar, the driver comprising. ...”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“[a]s a matter of claim draftsmanship, appellant is not barred from describing the driver in terms of the structure imposed upon it by the collar having plastically deformable lobes. The framework — the teachings of the prior art— against which patentability is measured is not all drivers broadly, but drivers suitable for use in combination with this collar, for the claims themselves are so limited.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“Whether a preamble of intended purpose constitutes a limitation to the claim is, as has long been established, a matter to be determined on the facts of each case in view of the claimed invention as a whole.”
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.