Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 355 F.3d 179 - Natural Resources Defense Council v. Abraham

Natural Resources Defense Council v. Abraham’s Empirical Analysis

355 F.3d 179 · 2004

Citation profile

36
cited by 36 later decisions
March 2024
most recently cited

12 federal appellate · 6 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 36 later decisions — most recently March 2024 · most notably Shi Liang Lin v. United States Department of Justice (2007), W.R. Grace & Co. v. Zotos International, Inc. (2009)

12 federal appellate · 6 district ·

200200420102020decided

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 Chevron U. S. A. Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. · Motor Vehicle Manufacturers Association of United States Inc v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company Consumer Alert · United States v. Mead Corp. · Christensen v. Harris County · Florida Power & Light Co. v. Lorion

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 36 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “[A]ltering the effective date of a duly promulgated standard could be, in substance, tantamount to an amendment or rescission of the standard[ ].”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “in light of the well-established principle that an agency literally has no power to act unless and until Congress confers power upon it.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “see, e.g., 42 U.S.C. § 6295 (f)(1)(B) (2003), suggesting that the terms are interchangeable. 51 Thus, once new standards are published, DOE has discharged its obligation to prescribe an amended standard or announce its decision not to under the provisions requiring periodic review. Furthermore, once an efficiency standard is published, regardless of the fact that manufacturers have a number of years to bring themselves into compliance, it becomes the”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage

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.