In re Spitzglass’s Empirical Analysis
96 F.2d 1002 · 1938
Citation profile
How this case has been cited
Cited by 7 later decisions — most recently June 1954
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 Continental Paper Bag Company v. Eastern Paper Bag Company · Davis Sewing Mach. Co. v. New Departure Mfg. 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 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Obviousiy, the ‘linkage’ referred to in claim 1, which is referred to in the other appealed claims as ‘means,’ does not merely serve to provide a working relation for the dials, but, due to its structure, operates them in such manner that the desired result is obtained. Such operation of the dials is dependent upon the construction and arrangement of the linkage. The linkage, therefore, is the very essence of the invention, and, being such, its mechanical structure or the arrangement of its various parts and not merely its function or the result obtained by its use should be set forth in the claims. Davis Sewing Mach. Co. v. New Departure Mfg. Co., supra [6 Cir., 217 F. 775 ]; Walker on Patents, Deller’s Edition, Vol. 2, p. 790, et seq. “We have examined each of the appealed claims and are in agreement with the tribunals of the Patent Office that the ‘linkage’ or ‘means’ by which the dials are made to cooperate is not defined in terms'of mechanical arrangement, but rather in terms of function or result. The claims are sufficiently broad to include all means capable of making the dials perform in the desired manner, and differ from the prior art only in terms of the result obtained. See Ex parte Paige, 1887 C.D. 71; Ex parte Pacholder, 1890 C.D. 55; Ex parte Halfpenny, 1895 C.D. 91, which cases were citéd in the decision in the Davis Sewing Mach. Co. Case, supra.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. In re Ray
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.