Pyle Nat. Co. v. Lewin’s Empirical Analysis
92 F.2d 628 · 1937
Citation profile
18 federal appellate · 4 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 37 later decisions — most recently June 2013 · most notably Copease Manufacturing Co., Inc., a Delaware Corporation, and Cross-Appellee v. American Photocopy Equipment Co., a Partnership Samuel G. Rautbord, Apartner and American Photocopy Equipment Company, an Illinois Corporation,defendants- and Cross-Appellants. Copease Manufacturing Co., Inc., and Cross-Appellee v. Poray, Inc., an Illinois Corporation, and Cross-Appellant (1962), Patterson-Ballagh Corp. v. Moss (1953)
18 federal appellate · 4 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 Potts v. Creager · Carnegie Steel Company v. Cambria Iron Company · Expanded Metal Co. v. Bradford · Temco Electric Motor Co v. Apco Mfg Co · Krementz v. S. Cottle 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 37 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Whether the court was justified in awarding treble damages as torthe [pat-entee] prior to an accounting of damages and profits to be stated by a master presents a question not free from doubt. While we are unable to find any case where the question has been directly passed upon, yet it seems to be the universal practice for the District Court to make such determination only after the amount and character of the damages have been stated. A reading of section 70, title 36, U.S.C.A., indicates this to be the proper procedure. It will be noted the section authorizes the court to grant injunctions, direct an accounting of profits by the defendant, and assess damages which the complainant has sustained. This may be done, of course, by reference to a master. Afterwards in the same section is found the authority to increase such damages. We are of the opinion that such increase should not be allowed until after an accounting has been had.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“It is also insisted that the idea involved in appellee's device is so simple and obvious it does not constitute invention. True, it now has that appearance. The fact, however, that this improvement was long overlooked, using devices far less satisfactory, cannot be ignored.”
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.