Ecolab, Inc. v. Envirochem, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that “substantially uniform” should be construed as “largely but not wholly in the same form”
• noting that Webster’s Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary, 1176 (9th ed. 1983), defines “substantially” to mean “largely but not wholly that which is specified”
• noting that Webster’s Ninth New Collegiate Dictionary, 1176 (9th ed. 1983), defines “substantially” to mean “largely but not wholly that which is specified”
• finding that hiring of new employees, modification of equipment, engagement in sales and marketing activities related to new [product] are damages normally associated with finding of infringement and not the typé of damages necessary for economic prejudice
• “Where the function is not recited in the claim itself by the patentee, we do not import such a limitation.”
• “Where the function is not recited in the claim itself by the patentee, we do not import such a limitation.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

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

• Allen Engineering Corporation v. Bartell Industries, Inc. And Darragh Company
  Federal Circuit· 2002-08-01· cited 341×
• Seachange International, Inc. v. C-Cor, Inc.
  Federal Circuit· 2005-06-29· cited 205×
• Sam Duty v. Norton-Alcoa Proppants
  Eighth Circuit· 2002-06-18· cited 147×
• Medrad, Inc. v. Mri Devices Corp.
  Federal Circuit· 2005-03-16· cited 146×
• Harris Corporation v. Ericsson, Inc.
  Federal Circuit· 2005-08-05· cited 139×
• Deere & Co. v. Bush Hog, LLC
  Federal Circuit· 2012-12-04· cited 110×
• Aventis Pharmaceuticals Inc. v. Amino Chemicals Ltd.
  Federal Circuit· 2013-05-20· cited 109×
• Anchor Wall Systems, Inc. v. Rockwood Retaining Walls, Inc., Gls Industries, Inc., Equipment, Inc., Raymond R. Price, and Gerald P. Price
  Federal Circuit· 2003-10-07· cited 105×
• Sunovion Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc.
  Federal Circuit· 2013-09-26· cited 91×
• Lnp Engineering Plastics, Inc. And Kawasaki Chemical Holding Co., Inc. v. Miller Waste Mills, Inc. (Trading as Rtp Company), Defendant-Cross
  Federal Circuit· 2001-12-21· cited 87×
• Verve, LLC v. Crane Cams, Inc., Crower Cams & Equipment Company, Inc., Trend Products, Inc., and Competition Cams, Inc., and Manton Racing Products
  Federal Circuit· 2002-11-14· cited 65×
• Astra Aktiebolag v. Andrx Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
  S.D. New York· 2002-10-16· cited 63×
• Resource Investments, Inc. v. United States
  Federal Claims· 2009-01-23· cited 60×
• Aspex Eyewear, Inc. v. Clariti Eyewear, Inc.
  Federal Circuit· 2010-05-24· cited 48×
• The Toro Company v. White Consolidated Industries, Inc. And Wci Outdoor Products, Inc.
  Federal Circuit· 2001-09-24· cited 42×
• State of California v. United States
  Federal Circuit· 2001-11-27· cited 42×
• Ancora Technologies, Inc. v. Apple, Inc.
  Federal Circuit· 2014-03-03· cited 28×
• Vantage Associates, Inc. v. United States
  Federal Claims· 2003-08-07· cited 22×
• Voter Verified, Inc. v. Premier Election Solutions, Inc.
  Federal Circuit· 2012-11-05· cited 21×
• Glaxo Wellcome, Inc. v. Andrx Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
  Federal Circuit· 2003-09-22· cited 18×

Cites

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

• Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, Administratrix of the Estate of Catrett
  Supreme Court· 1986-06-25· cited 119,442×
• MARKMAN Et Al. v. WESTVIEW INSTRUMENTS, INC., Et Al.
  Supreme Court· 1996-04-29· cited 3,226×
• Herbert Markman and Positek, Inc. v. Westview Instruments, Inc. And Althon Enterprises, Inc.
  Federal Circuit· 1995-04-05· cited 2,940×
• Cybor Corporation v. Fas Technologies, Inc., and Fastar Ltd., Defendants-Cross
  Federal Circuit· 1998-03-25· cited 1,536×
• Warner-Jenkinson Co. v. Hilton Davis Chemical Co.
  Supreme Court· 1997-03-03· cited 1,430×
• Southwall Technologies, Inc. v. Cardinal Ig Company
  Federal Circuit· 1995-06-21· cited 625×
• A.C. Aukerman Company v. R.L. Chaides Construction Co.
  Federal Circuit· 1992-05-19· cited 585×
• Carl B. Bai v. L & L Wings, Inc., D/B/A Wings, and Great World Co. Of New York Ltd., and Elufa Fashions, Inc.
  Federal Circuit· 1998-11-03· cited 407×
• The Standard Oil Company, Appellant/cross-Appellee v. American Cyanamid Company, Appellee/cross-Appellant
  Federal Circuit· 1985-09-25· cited 330×
• Carroll Touch, Inc. v. Electro Mechanical Systems, Inc., Defendant/cross-Appellant
  Federal Circuit· 1993-08-24· cited 304×
• Interactive Gift Express, Inc. v. Compuserve Inc.
  Federal Circuit· 2001-07-13· cited 234×
• Samuel Gart v. Logitech, Inc.
  Federal Circuit· 2001-06-26· cited 225×
• Pall Corporation, Plaintiff/cross-Appellant v. Micron Separations, Inc.
  Federal Circuit· 1995-10-24· cited 224×
• Intervet America, Inc. v. Kee-Vet Laboratories, Inc., Robert D. Keenum, and Keenum, Inc.
  Federal Circuit· 1989-10-06· cited 205×
• York Products, Inc. v. Central Tractor Farm & Family Center and Custom Form Manufacturing, Inc.
  Federal Circuit· 1996-11-01· cited 201×
• Festo Corporation v. Shoketsu Kinzoku Kogyo Kabushiki Co., Ltd., A/K/A Smc Corporation, and Smc Pneumatics, Inc.
  Federal Circuit· 2000-11-29· cited 196×
• Seattle Box Company, Inc., D/B/A Seattle-Tacoma Box Company v. Industrial Crating & Packing, Inc., and James F. Rennels
  Federal Circuit· 1984-03-26· cited 174×
• Kemco Sales, Inc. v. Control Papers Co.
  Federal Circuit· 2000-04-07· cited 166×
• The Laitram Corporation and Intralox, Inc. v. Cambridge Wire Cloth Company
  Federal Circuit· 1989-02-09· cited 117×
• Jack A. Ekchian v. The Home Depot, Inc., MacKlanburg Company, Mti Corporation and Zircon Corporation, and Lucas Automation & Control Engineering, Inc.
  Federal Circuit· 1997-01-10· cited 115×