In re Verhoef’s Empirical Analysis
888 F.3d 1362 · 2018
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 2 district ·
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1295 · 35 U.S.C. § 102 · 35 U.S.C. § 116 · 35 U.S.C. § 256
Relies on Consolidated Edison Co of New York v. National Labor Relations Board · In re Gartside · Burroughs Wellcome Co. v. Barr Laboratories, Inc. · Pannu v. Iolab Corp. · PerSeptive Biosystems, Inc. v. Pharmacia Biotech, 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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) contribute in some significant manner to the conception or reduction to practice of the invention, (2) make a contribution to the claimed invention that is not insignificant in quality, when that contribution is measured against the dimension of the full invention, and (3) do more than merely explain to the real inventors well-known concepts and/or the current state of the art.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“an essential feature of the claimed invention”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“Determining inventorship is nothing more than determining who conceived the subject matter at issue ....”
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.