Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 83 F.2d 111 - Oates v. Camp

Oates v. Camp’s Empirical Analysis

83 F.2d 111 · 1936

Citation profile

25
cited by 25 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
June 1989
most recently cited

13 federal appellate · 7 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 25 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 1989 · most notably Dellmuth v. A Muth (1989), Georgia-Pacific Corp. v. United States Plywood Corp. (1958)

13 federal appellate · 7 district ·

100193619401950196019701980decided

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 Eibel Process Co. v. Minnesota & Ontario Paper Co. · Sanitary Refrigerator Co. v. Winters · Elizabeth v. Pavement Co. · Union Paper-Bag Machine Company v. Murphy · Smith v. Snow

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 25 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““Certainly one who * * * takes the heart of an invention cannot escape liability for infringement by such slight changes in form and such use of obvious equivalents. As was said by Mr. Justice Curtis speaking for the Supreme Court in Winans v. Denmead, 15 How. 330, 342 , 14 L.Ed. 717 : “ ‘It is only ingenious diversities of form and proportion, presenting the appearance of something unlike the thing patented, which give rise to question; and the property of inventors would be valueless, if it were enough for the defendant to say, your improvement consisted in a change of form; I have not taken that, and so have not infringed. The answer is, my improvement did not consist in a change of form, but in the new employment of principles or powers, in a new mode of operation, embodied in a form by means of which a new or better result is produced; it was this which constituted my invention; this you have copied, changing only the form.’ ””
    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.