With the ordinance upheld, many other communities across the country passed similar anti-paraphernalia ordinances. Court challenges continued, but eventually sales of drug paraphernalia became less widespread, as many record stores and small retailers felt they could no longer sell such merchandise profitably under the restrictions. The DEA would later claim that "thousands of paraphernalia shops were literally legislated out of business." Drug paraphernalia is still sold today, but in a legal gray area. Congress passed a federal ban in 1986; in all states save West Virginia (which just requires a license) paraphernalia is prohibited as well. Often they are accompanied by signs that remind purchasers they are meant for legal purposes only; retailers will also deny any sale where a customer mentions illegal use. Many sellers have moved to the Internet, where the industry has once reached, according to a 2003 estimate, a billion dollars in annual sales. "Hoffman Estates" guided many lower courts considering similar cases, but it did not guarantee the same result. Where no distinction between the challenged ordinance or statute and the one at issue in "Hoffman Estates" could be made, the governments prevailed, as in "Stoianoff v. Montana", a Ninth Circuit case early in 1983. However, in late 1983, an Ohio district judge threw out a similar ordinance from West Carrollton because it had failed to include any guidelines. Back on the Seventh Circuit, two more cases decided shortly after "Hoffman Estates" considered two different types of ordinances in light of that holding. One, "Levas and Levas v. Village of Antioch", concerned the model DEA ordinance, passed by another Illinois community. The other, "Record Head Corp. v. Sachen", turned on a West Allis, Wisconsin, ordinance that carried criminal penalties. The same three-judge panel, consisting of circuit chief judge Walter J. Cummings, Jr., Circuit judge Wilbur Frank Pell, Jr. and William G. East, a senior judge of the District of Oregon sitting by designation, heard both cases but deferred deciding them while "Hoffman Estates" was pending. Afterwards, it asked all parties for fresh briefs on their positions taking the decision into account, and announced both decisions on the same day, four months after "Hoffman Estates". The panel upheld the Antioch ordinance in "Levas" but struck down the West Allis ordinance in "Record Head". The decisions were not unanimous. Pell issued a one-sentence concurring opinion in the former but dissented at length from the latter.