In Re Jung

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• explaining that while “the applicant must identify to the Board what the examiner did wrong, . . . the examiner retains the burden to show invalidity”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

13 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Aqua Products, Inc. v. Matal
  Federal Circuit· 2017-10-04· cited 97×
• Rambus Inc. v. Rea
  Federal Circuit· 2013-09-24· cited 72×
• In Re Magnum Oil Tools International, Ltd.
  Federal Circuit· 2016-07-25· cited 65×
• In Re Antor Media Corp.
  Federal Circuit· 2012-07-27· cited 31×
• Inre: Packard
  Federal Circuit· 2014-05-06· cited 30×
• Honeywell International Inc. v. Mexichem Amanco Holding S.A. De C.V.
  Federal Circuit· 2017-08-01· cited 21×
• Inre: Biedermann
  Federal Circuit· 2013-10-18· cited 13×
• Virnetx Inc. v. Apple Inc.
  Federal Circuit· 2019-08-01· cited 12×
• In Re: Doron Adler
  Federal Circuit· 2013-07-18· cited 10×
• Alberts v. Kappos
  District of Columbia· 2013-01-18· cited 4×
• Disney Enterprises, Inc. v. Rea
  E.D. Virginia· 2013-04-11· cited 1×
• Hitkansut LLC v. United States
  Federal Claims· 2019-03-15
• Berkeley Lights, Inc.
  Trademark Trial and Appeal Board· 2022-10-25

Cites

7 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• In Re Frank N. Piasecki and Donald N. Meyers
  Federal Circuit· 1984-10-17· cited 96×
• In Re Hans Oetiker
  Federal Circuit· 1992-10-13· cited 88×
• In Re Anthony J. Robertson and Charles L. Scripps
  Federal Circuit· 1999-02-25· cited 57×
• In Re Sujeet Kumar
  Federal Circuit· 2005-08-15· cited 33×
• Arthur W. Chester, Albert B. Schwartz and William A. Stover v. Stephen J. Miller and Keith C. Bishop
  Federal Circuit· 1990-06-29· cited 27×
• In re Kronig
  Customs and Patent Appeals· 1976-07-22· cited 25×
• Hyatt v. Dudas
  Federal Circuit· 2007-06-28· cited 23×