4 canonical passages across 4 cases, quoted by 49 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side — they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from The Laitram Corporation and Intralox, Inc. v. Cambridge Wire Cloth Company.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | The Laitram Corporation and Intralox, Inc. v. Cambridge Wire Cloth Company Anchor | green | “references to a preferred embodiment, such as those often present in a specification, are not claim limitations.” | 22 |
| 2 | Pitney Bowes, Inc. v. Hewlett-Packard Company, Defendant-Cross | green | “the starting point for any claim construction must be the claims themselves.” | 16 |
| 3 | The Toro Company v. White Consolidated Industries, Inc., and Wci Outdoor Products, Inc. | green | “it is well established that the preferred embodiment does not limit broader claims that are supported by the written description.” | 7 |
| 4 | White v. Dunbar | green | “it is unjust to the public, as well as an evasion of the law, to construe a claim in a manner different from the plain import of its terms. this has been so often expressed in the opinions of this court that it is unnecessary to pursue the subject further.” | 4 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment — for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.