Fisons PLC v. Quigg’s Empirical Analysis
876 F.2d 99 · 1989
Citation profile
4 federal appellate ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 11 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently August 2004
4 federal appellate ·
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
Applies 35 U.S.C. § 156
Relies on Tennessee Valley Authority v. Hill · Garcia v. United States · Crooks v. Harrelson · Baltimore & Ohio Railway Co. v. Jackson · Hudson Distributors, Inc. v. Eli Lilly & Co.
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 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[I]t follows that because Fisons' patented new products containing cromolyn sodium did not qualify as the first permitted commercial marketing or use of the active ingredient cromolyn sodium, extensions of the patent term for the subject patents were not permissible.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“the first permitted commercial marketing or use of the product under the provision of law.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“active ingredient of a new drug ... including any salt or ester of the active ingredient,”
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.