Amstar Corporation v. Envirotech Corporation and Energy Fuels Nuclear, Inc.’s Empirical Analysis
730 F.2d 1476 · 1984
Citation profile
9 federal appellate · 20 district · 1 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 136 later decisions — most recently September 2017 · most notably Pennwalt Corporation, Appellant/cross-Appellee v. Durand-Wayland, Inc., Appellee/cross-Appellant (1987), Atlas Powder Company v. Ei Du Pont De Nemours & Company (1984)
9 federal appellate · 20 district · 1 state decisions
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
Applies 35 U.S.C. § 103 · 35 U.S.C. § 271 · 35 U.S.C. § 282 · 35 U.S.C. § 284
Relies on Graham v. John Deere Company of Kansas City Calmar Inc · Graver Tank & Mfg. Co. v. Linde Air Products Co. · Sanitary Refrigerator Co. v. Winters · Howard v. United States · United States v. Grinnell Corp.
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 136 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“infringement cannot be avoided by the mere fact that the accused device is more or less efficient or performs additional functions”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“[M]odification by mere addition of elements or functions ... cannot negate infringement”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“[U]nitary substantially horizontal baffle means adjacent the point of entry established by said conduit means for arresting and altering the direction of motion of said influent feed whereby the in-fluent feed is directed in a horizontally outward direction with respect to said centralized point of entry.”
1 later decision 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.