Blake v. Professional Coin Grading Service’s Empirical Analysis
2012
Citation profile
6 district ·
Relationships
Applies 15 U.S.C. § 1060 (§ 10 of the Trademark Act of 1946 (Lanham Act)) · 15 U.S.C. § 1125 (§ 43 of the Trademark Act of 1946 (Lanham Act)) · 28 U.S.C. § 1331 · 28 U.S.C. § 1332 (Class Action Fairness Act of 2005) · 28 U.S.C. § 1367
Relies on Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly · Ashcroft v. Iqbal · Blue Chip Stamps v. Manor Drug Stores · Ruckelshaus v. Monsanto Co. · Lear, Inc. v. Adkins
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.
“Any alleged interaction regarding the confidential information took place between Numismatic and [plaintiff]. Professional Grading is too far removed from this exchange to warrant liability on an unjust enrichment theory.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“fail[ed] to state that the benefit was 'conferred upon the defendant by the plaintiff .'”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“in the public domain . . . there for the free use of the public.”
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.