Just another WordPress.com weblog
In an infringement dispute regarding a patent related to a chess-like, light-reflecting board game, summary judgment by district court is affirmed in part and reversed in part where the court correctly found no genuine issues of material fact regarding literal infringement based on its construction of a claim term but erred in several of its factual findings underlying its nonobviousness determination.
Continue reading at Innovation Toys v. MGA Entertainment, No. 2010-1290
In a dispute over whether plaintiff was entitled to post-entry duty refunds under NAFTA, even though it failed to file the pertinent certificates of origin within the prescribed period, dismissal by trial court for lack of subject matter jurisdiction is reversed where untimely filing of certificates did not vitiate jurisdiction.
Continue reading at Ford Motor Co. v. US, No. 2010-1238
In a facial challenge by attorneys, journalists, and labor, legal, media, and human rights organizations to the constitutionality of Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978, dismissal by district court for lack of standing is reversed where appellants have standing because of a reasonable fear of future injury and the costs incurred to avoid such injury.
Continue reading at Amnesty International USA v. Clapper, No. 09-4112
In a dormant commerce clause challenge to a state regulatory scheme for the training and compensation of apprentices on construction projects, summary judgment in favor of plaintiff is affirmed where refusal to recognize out-of-state registered apprentices facially discriminated against out-of-state contractors without advancing a legitimate state interest.
Continue reading at Tri-M Group v. Sharp, No. 10-2365
In breach of contract dispute, award of damages by district court to plaintiff upon finding that defendant breached an options contract by retroactively valuing company’s shares, such that options held by plaintiff were worth approximately half of their true value, is affirmed where nothing in contract expressly authorized defendant to arbitrarily and retroactively revalue shares after plaintiff exercised right to options.
Continue reading at Fishoff v. Coty, No. 10-0536
In dispute involving the scope of the Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act of 1994 (USERRA), if a supervisor performs an act motivated by anti-military animus that is intended by the supervisor to cause an adverse employment action, and if that act is a proximate cause of the ultimate employment action, then employer is liable under USERRA.
Continue reading at Staub v. Proctor Hospital, No. 09–400
Conviction and sentencing of defendant for possession of child pornography are upheld where district court denied motion to suppress because affidavit on which search warrant was issued contained adequate description of child pornography so as to support a probable cause determination.
Continue reading at US v. Miknevich, No. 09-3059
In a landlord-tenant dispute involving an injunction against the eviction of elderly, low-income tenants who wished to pay a portion of their rent using federally-funded enhanced vouchers, injunction is affirmed in part because the individual plaintiffs have a statutory right to remain in the complex, but reversed and remand in part where plaintiffs failed to identify any evidence or statutory authority upon which to base a mandatory injunction compelling defendants to enter into contracts with local housing authority, so long as defendants are willing to forgo payment of that portion of the rent covered by the enhanced vouchers.
Continue reading at Park Village v. Mortimer Howard Trust, No. 10-15303
Conviction of defendant for second degree murder and firearms-related crimes, based on statements by unavailable witness is upheld where statements were not testimonial and therefore not violative of the Confrontation Clause, where statements primary purpose was to enable police to meet an ongoing emergency.
Continue reading at Michigan v. Bryant
In an action brought by a trustee of a revocable trust seeking a refund of a penalty imposed by the Internal Revenue Service for late payment of an estate tax, summary judgment to the government is affirmed where: 1) the substantial compliance doctrine does not excuse plaintiff’s failure to strictly comply with the regulations governing requests for extension of time to pay estate taxes; 2) the doctrine of equitable estoppel does not bar the IRS from imposing a late payment penalty and assessing interest; and 3) the district court properly granted summary judgment to the U.S. on the issue of whether the late payment penalty should be abated on the grounds of reasonable cause.
Continue reading Baccei v. US, No. 08-16965
