Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 98 F.2d 332 - Becket v. Coe

Becket v. Coe’s Empirical Analysis

98 F.2d 332 · 1937

Citation profile

48
cited by 48 later decisions
July 1974
most recently cited

12 federal appellate · 14 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 48 later decisions — most recently July 1974 · most notably Dewey & Almy Chemical Co. v. Mimex Co. (1942), California Research Corp. v. Ladd (1966)

12 federal appellate · 14 district ·

17019371940195019601970decided

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 Carson v. American Smelting & Refining Co. · Skelly Oil Co. v. Universal Oil Products Co. · American Stainless Steel Co. v. Ludlum Steel Co. · General Electric Co. v. Hoskins Mfg. Co. · Westinghouse Air-Brake Co. v. Great Northern Ry. 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 48 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““9. A stain-resisting iron-base alloy having deep-drawing properties and comprising from about 16% to about 22% of chromium; about 0.25% to about 2.75% of copper; carbon, the carbon content being not more than about 0.3%; at least about 3% of manganese and at least about 2% of nickel, the sum of the maganese and nickel percentages falling between about 6%'and about 14%; the balance of the alloy being substantially iron.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““Patentability of an alloy upon the basis of new proportions of old elements requires that the new proportions give a new result; either a new alloy, or an old alloy with new characteristics which result in entirely new, or substantially enhanced, qualities of utility.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “The disclosure of a foreign patent is to be measured not by what may be made out of it, but what is clearly and definitely expressed in it.”
    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.