In Re Diane M Dillon’s Empirical Analysis
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 10 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 56 later decisions — most recently April 2020 · most notably Enzo Biochem, Inc. v. Calgene, Inc. (1999), Yamanouchi Pharmaceutical Co Ltd Merck Co Inc v. Danbury Pharmacal Inc Schein Pharmaceutical Inc Marsam Pharmaceuticals Inc (2000)
3 federal appellate · 10 district ·
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 Kotteakos v. United States · Graham v. John Deere Company of Kansas City Calmar Inc · Vasquez v. Hillery · United States v. Adams · Burnet v. Coronado Oil & Gas 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 56 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“structural similarity between claimed and prior art subject matter, ... where the prior art gives reason or motivation to make the claimed compositions, creates a prima facie case of obviousness”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[t]he factual determination of the scope and content of the prior art, see Graham, 383 U.S. at 17 , 86 S.Ct. 684 , is, of course, directed to prior art that meets the conditions of section 102. Section 102 describes prior art as what is published or otherwise known, including subject matter in public use or on sale.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent“a comparison of test data showing that the claimed compositions possess unexpectedly improved properties ... that the prior art does not have, that the prior art is so deficient that there is no motivation to make what might otherwise appear to be obvious changes, or any other argument ... that is pertinent.”
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.