Intermec Technologies Corp. v. Palm Inc.’s Empirical Analysis
2011
Citation profile
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1338 · 35 U.S.C. § 101
Relies on Max's Seafood Cafe Lou-Ann Inc v. Quinteros · Harsco Corp. v. Zlotnicki · Jones v. Pittsburgh National Corp. · Federal Kemper Insurance v. Rauscher · 735 F. Supp. 1239 - Brambles USA, Inc. v. Blocker
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 1 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) an intervening change in the controlling law; (2) the availability of new evidence that was not available when the court granted the motion; or (3) the need to correct a clear error of law or fact or to prevent manifest injustice.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. In re Sellers
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.