Microsoft Corp. v. Biscotti, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis
878 F.3d 1052 · 2017
Citation profile
4 federal appellate · 1 district ·
Relationships
Applies 35 U.S.C. § 102
Relies on Anderson v. City of Bessemer City · Lavender v. Kurn · Reckendorfer v. Faber · Connell v. Sears, Roebuck & Co. · Teva Pharm. United States, Inc. v. Sandoz, Inc.
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 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[C]ase law from the Supreme Court and this court has stated for decades that anticipation is a factual question.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“[A]nticipation is not proven by 'multiple, distinct teachings that the artisan might somehow combine to achieve the claimed invention.'”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“Unexpired claims subject to inter partes review are to be given their 'broadest reasonable construction.'”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
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.