Step-Saver Data Systems, Inc. v. Wyse Technology’s Empirical Analysis
939 F.2d 91 · 1991
Citation profile
22 federal appellate · 16 district · 15 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 91 later decisions — most recently August 2022 · most notably United States v. Ruhe (1999), Registercom Inc v. Verio Inc
22 federal appellate · 16 district · 15 state decisions — followed in 11 states
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
Applies 17 U.S.C. § 109 (§ 101 of the Copyright Act of 1976)
Relies on Raphan v. United States · Zerman v. Melton · Sears, Roebuck & Co. v. Stiffel Co. · Kewanee Oil Co. v. Bicron Corp. · Bonito Boats, Inc. v. Thunder Craft Boats, 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 91 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) A definite and seasonable expression of acceptance or a written confirmation which is sent within a reasonable time operates as an acceptance even though it states terms additional to or different from those offered or agreed upon, unless acceptance is expressly made conditional on assent to the additional or different terms. (2) The additional terms are to be construed as proposals for addition to the contract. Between merchants such terms become part of the contract unless: (a) the offer expressly limits acceptance to the terms of the offer; (b) they materially alter it; or (c) notification of objection to them has already been given or is given within a reasonable time after notice of them is received.”
11 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“the repeated sending of a writing which contains certain standard terms, without any action with respect to the issues addressed by those terms, cannot constitute a course of dealing which would incorporate a term of the writing otherwise excluded under § 2-207”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“We see no need to parse the parties’s various actions to decide exactly when the parties formed a contract.... The parties’s performance demonstrates the existence of a contract. The dispute is, therefore, not over the existence of a contract, but the nature of its terms. When the parties’s conduct establishes a contract, but the parties have failed to adopt expressly a particular writing as the terms of their agreement, and the writings exchanged by the parties do not agree, UCC § 2-207 determines the terms of the contract.”
3 later decisions 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.