Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 9 F.1d 284 - Kells v. McKenzie

Kells v. McKenzie’s Empirical Analysis

9 F. 284 · 1881

Citation profile

5
cited by 5 later decisions
November 1926
most recently cited

1 federal appellate ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently November 1926

1 federal appellate ·

3018811890190019101920decided

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

Relies on Smith v. Goodyear Dental Vulcanite Co. · Leggett v. Avery · Powder Company v. Powder Works · Russell v. Dodge · Joseph Battin Patentee and Samuel Battin Assignee v. James Taggert Joseph Battin Patentee and Samuel Battin Assignee

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 5 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““Where the commissioner accepts a surrender of an original patent, and grants a new patent, his decision in the premises in a suit for infringement is final and conclusive, and is not re-examinable in such suit in the circuit court unless it is apparent upon the face of the patent that ho has exceeded his authority; that there is such repugnancy between the old and the new patent that it must be hold, as a matter of legal construction, that the new patent is not for the same invention as that embraced and secured in the original patent.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.