Brand v. Thomas’s Empirical Analysis
96 F.2d 301 · 1938
Citation profile
5 federal appellate · 3 district ·
How this case has been cited
Cited by 100 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently June 1999 · most notably Dickinson v. Zurko (1999), Hansgirg v. Kemmer (1939)
5 federal appellate · 3 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 Railway Company v. Sayles · Lindley v. Shepherd · Steenstrup v. Morton · Cooper v. Downing · Cleveland Gas Burner & Appliance Co. v. American Heater Corp.
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 100 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““ * * * Lack of clear disclosure is not supplied by a speculation as to what one skilled in the art might do or might not do if he followed the teaching of the inventor. The disclosure should be clearer than to suggest that one skilled in the art might construct the device in a particular manner.” (Italics quoted.)”
5 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Binstead v. Littmann · Walter
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.