In Re Swanson

How courts have described this case

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

• describing “Congress’ purpose of allowing for a reexamination proce- dure to correct examiner errors”
• “Any person may file a request for an ex parte reexamination of an issued patent based on prior art patents or printed publications.”
• “PTO examination procedures have 19 distinctly different standards, parties, purposes, and outcomes compared to civil litigation.”
• “{T]he ultimate question of whether the reexamination is based on a substantial new question of patentability ... remains a question of law, which we review de novo.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

36 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

• In Re Baxter International, Inc.
  Federal Circuit· 2012-05-17· cited 133×
• Fresenius USA, Inc. v. Baxter International, Inc.
  Federal Circuit· 2013-07-02· cited 127×
• Gonzales v. United States
  Supreme Court· 2008-12-08· cited 76×
• Rein v. United States Patent & Trademark Office
  Fourth Circuit· 2009-01-28· cited 71×
• In Re NTP, Inc.
  Federal Circuit· 2011-08-01· cited 45×
• Celgene Corporation v. Peter
  Federal Circuit· 2019-07-30· cited 36×
• Xianli Zhang v. United States
  Federal Circuit· 2011-04-06· cited 34×
• Old Reliable Wholesale, Inc. v. Cornell Corp.
  Federal Circuit· 2011-03-16· cited 30×
• In re Cipro Cases I & II
  California Supreme Court· 2015-05-07· cited 30×
• Indian Harbor Insurance v. United States
  Federal Circuit· 2013-01-11· cited 26×
• In Re Construction Equipment Co.
  Federal Circuit· 2011-12-08· cited 16×
• Dome Patent L.P. v. Lee
  Federal Circuit· 2015-09-03· cited 14×
• In Re Basell Poliolefine Italia S.P.A.
  Federal Circuit· 2008-11-13· cited 11×
• Loughlin v. Ling
  Federal Circuit· 2012-07-11· cited 9×
• Q.I. Press Controls, B v. v. Lee
  Federal Circuit· 2014-06-09· cited 8×
• In Re CELLECT, LLC
  Federal Circuit· 2023-08-28· cited 7×
• In Re Giacomini
  Federal Circuit· 2010-07-07· cited 4×
• 01 Communique Laboratory, Inc. v. Citrix Systems, Inc.
  N.D. Ohio· 2015-12-21· cited 4×
• Sigram Schindler Beteiligungsgesellschaft v. Cisco Systems, Inc.
  D. Delaware· 2010-07-26· cited 3×
• Dome Patent, L.P. v. Rea
  District of Columbia· 2014-07-01· cited 3×

Cites

26 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

• Duncan v. Walker
  Supreme Court· 2001-06-18· cited 2,368×
• Bowles v. Seminole Rock & Sand Co.
  Supreme Court· 1945-06-04· cited 1,565×
• Harris v. United States
  Supreme Court· 2002-06-24· cited 1,506×
• Plaut v. Spendthrift Farm, Inc.
  Supreme Court· 1995-04-18· cited 1,015×
• Chicago & Southern Air Lines, Inc. v. Waterman Steamship Corp.
  Supreme Court· 1948-04-13· cited 928×
• Garcia v. United States
  Supreme Court· 1985-02-19· cited 768×
• Crandon v. United States
  Supreme Court· 1990-02-27· cited 696×
• In Re Robert J. Gartside and Richard C. Norton
  Federal Circuit· 2000-02-15· cited 665×
• Ethicon, Inc. v. Donald J. Quigg, Commissioner of Patents & Trademarks and the United States Patent & Trademark Office
  Federal Circuit· 1988-06-15· cited 284×
• Gonzalez v. United States
  Supreme Court· 2008-05-12· cited 192×
• In Re Jack E. Caveney and Roy A. Moody
  Federal Circuit· 1985-05-08· cited 122×
• In Re Yujiro Yamamoto, and Dictaphone Corp., Intervenor
  Federal Circuit· 1984-08-07· cited 112×
• Robert L. Mendenhall, and Cmi Corporation v. Cedarapids, Inc., Defendant/cross-Appellant
  Federal Circuit· 1993-11-18· cited 108×
• In Re Berwyn E. Etter
  Federal Circuit· 1985-02-27· cited 106×
• Patlex Corporation v. Gerald J. Mossinghoff, Etc.
  Federal Circuit· 1985-03-07· cited 97×
• Richard Lawrence Stevenson v. Sears, Roebuck & Company
  Federal Circuit· 1983-07-27· cited 80×
• In Re American Academy of Science Tech Center
  Federal Circuit· 2004-05-13· cited 76×
• Gonzales v. United States
  Supreme Court· 2008-12-08· cited 76×
• Ballard v. Commissioner
  Supreme Court· 2005-03-07· cited 67×
• Abbott Laboratories v. Syntron Bioresearch, Inc., Defendant-Cross-Appellant
  Federal Circuit· 2003-08-05· cited 64×