Federal Circuit -- AUGUST TECH CORP v. CAMTEK LTD

AUGUST TECH CORP v. CAMTEK LTD

   Patent infringement finding vacated, as trial court incorrectly construed term "wafer."

   In circuit printing, this can refer to multiple wafers.  Deft preserved the argument by advancing a claim construction that could encompass multiple wafers.

   Trial court correctly handled second claim, which TMB isn't even going to try to summarize.

   Substantial evidence for nonobviousness finding.

   When the on-sale date is questioned, the relevant threshold event is not the time it becomes patentable, but when it is conceived.

   [Really, folks - don't rely on any of these summaries, but especially don't rely on the patent and tax stuff.]

   

Eleventh Circuit -- Roland L. Walker, et al vs CSX Transportation, Inc., et al

Roland L. Walker, et al vs CSX Transportation, Inc., et al 

   Absent proof that interior cargo doors could function as an effective fail-safe, no error in summary judgment for deft, as alleged failure to maintain was not a proximate cause.

   Plaintiff had earlier introduced proof of this from an expert who was TKO'd under Daubert, and also offered trade group safety rules. 

Ninth Cicuit -- USA V. HOBERT PARKER, JR.

USA V. HOBERT PARKER, JR.

    Statute allowing prosecution for going onto a military base without permission cannot be used to prosecute a protester on the public road outside the gate, as the road was an easement granted to the state, and the statute requires absolute control.

 

Ninth Circuit -- FLEXIBLE LIFELINE SYSTEMS, INC V. PRECISION LIFT, INC.

FLEXIBLE LIFELINE SYSTEMS, INC V. PRECISION LIFT, INC.

   No presumption of irreparable harm on showing of copyright infringement.

     Ebay's requirement of actual injury applies to both permanent and temporary injunctions.

   

Ninth Circuit -- HERSHEL ROSENBAUM V. WASHOE COUNTY

HERSHEL ROSENBAUM V. WASHOE COUNTY

   S1983 Suit against Nevada policemen for arresting plaintiff for ticket scalping, as there's no law in Nevada against ticket scalping.  

   While the crime for which there is probable cause need not be the crime for which the arrest is made, there must be probable cause for some crime reasonably within the arsenal of crimes that officers enforce in the state.

   Arresting suspect in front of kids and telling them that their dad had committed a crime and was going to jail was insufficiently conscience-shocking to qualify as a violation of family integrity DP.

Ninth Circuit -- MARIA TORRES V. CITY OF MADERA

MARIA TORRES V. CITY OF MADERA

   No qualified immunity for police officer who killed handcuffed suspect in police car, thinking she was tasing him.  

   Error in summary judgment for deft, as jury could reasonably find that officer's belief that she was holding a taser to be unreasonable.

   Totality of the circumstances test means that conduct can be unreasonable absent any specific caselaw spelling out the balance in a particular circumstance.   

Ninth Circuit -- USA V. CHRISTOPHER CLEMENTS

USA V. CHRISTOPHER CLEMENTS

    Reversal of sex offender registration conviction, as Atty General's rulemaking holding SORNA to be retroactive did not comply with the APA.  

   Dissent - Should stay until Scotus rules on whether SORNA was retroactive even before the AG's rule. 

Ninth Circuit -- STEPHEN STEARNS V. TICKETMASTER CORP

STEPHEN STEARNS V. TICKETMASTER CORP

   Reversal of denial of class certification for consumers who incurred recurring charges on their credit card through a program on Tickemaster's website.

   Error in denial under typicality, intervening caselaw establishes that the statute requires likelihood of deception, not individual proof of causation.

   Error in denial of class for violation of state unfair practices law, as there is a presumption of reliance established where materiality of misleading statement is established.

     Notice requirement does not require that the notice inform deft that class action is impending.

     No abuse of discretion in denying class for EFTA claim, as different means of payment (credit/debit) might skew damage award calculation.

Seventh Circuit -- USA v. Randall Knope

USA v. Randall Knope

    Rated-R opinon in which conviction for child pr0n and enticement of a minor is upheld.

   Asking deft in back of police car where he lives is insufficient to trigger Miranda  protection for subsequent volunteered statements. 

   No error in trial court finding that consent to search of residence was voluntary. 

   Where deft correctly gives address, but police officer incorrectly records it on the consent form, the consent is still valid. 

    Trial court's under-explanation of admission of prior bad acts was harmless error.

    No error in court not giving free speech instruction saying that adult pr0n was protected, as it might prompt presumption that the pr0n was adult pr0n. 

   No error in denial of substantial step instruction where enticement instruction covered the same ground. 

   No error in denial of good faith instruction, as the ground was covered by the 'knowingly' instruction.

   No error in denial of entrapment defense instruction where deft doesn't prove inducement.

    No error in denial of theory of defense instruction holding that deft thought no actual minors were involved in the pr0n, as (1) the subject was covered in the general instruction of the offense and (2) no suggestion that images were not actual minors.

    No error in denial of theory of defense instruction that deft was leaving the Walgreen's parking lot, not pulling in, as it might have misled jury into thinking that going to the parking lot was not a substantial step. 

Sixth Circuit -- Denise Walker v. Danny Davis

Denise Walker v. Danny Davis

   Policeman who (allegedly intentionally) collided with motorcyclist during low-speed chase (<60 mph) across field doesn't get qualified immunity, as the motorcyclist wasn't a threat to anyone.  No need for there to have been caselaw establishing the don't-ram-motorcycles-in-fields rule prior to offense.

   Dissent: the decision to fee endangered the public, other circuits have held that colliding with a fleeing vehicle is kosher.

 

Sixth Circuit -- Montgomery v. Bobby

 Montgomery v. Bobby 

   Court reverses habeus grant for Brady  violation in death penalty case.

    Although the report that witnesses had seen victim alive after the time State argued that they had been killed was favorable to deft and suppressed, the question is materiality - did it prejudice the proceeding.  Here, the court holds that the other evidence of guilt was too overwhelming.  (Separately, after hearing that habeus had been granted on these grounds, witnesses had retracted.)  Not in for impeachment, given other substantial impeachments against witness.

    No error in not DQ'ing a juror who wrote the court a note explaining that she had been in psychiatric treatment and had experienced a dream about the defense psychiatrist as the devil.

   No reversible error in refusal to change venue, as petitioner has not demonstrated manifest error - deep and bitter prejudice throughout the community.

   No Brady  violation in nondisclosure of withdrawal of plea deal from non-testifying witness as not properly presented in District habeus petition.

   Concurrence: the suppressed report has zero exculpatory value, as deft clearly committed the crime.

   Special Concurrence:  Dissent is right on Brady claim, but no violation of clearly established federal law, as state court could reasonably have determined it to be non-material.

    Dissent - Coourt incorrectly confuses Strickland's presumption of trial court regularity with Brady's implication that suppression of the evidence is enough of an irregularity to pop that bubble. 

   Dissent:  I agree.

   Dissent:   Majority mis-characterizes facts, deference is too high - prevents painstaking search for constitutional errors.  By contrasting reasonable probability with reasonable possibility, majority gives a false spin to the former - the burden is lighter than that.  Suppressed report wasn't cumulative, as it changed the game. 

[Thou shalt not kill.  - TMB]


   

Fifth Circuit -- Godfrey Mark v. Rick Thaler, Director

Godfrey Mark v. Rick Thaler, Director

   Prisoner seeks federal habeus review - the issue is whether the AEDPA clock runs from the granting of petitioner's motion to dismiss his direct appeals, or from the end of the time he would have had to appeal that decision.  Court says the latter.

   A ruling dismissing a case may be appealed by any party for thirty days - the issue is not whether it would have been successful, but whether it could have been filed.

   General rule of practice that appeals dismissed on petitioner's motion are treated as if they had never been filed is a federal rule, not a Texas one.

   Dissent - contrary caselaw, some from other Circuits, holding that once a direct appeal is effectively final, the clock runs.

Fourth Circuit -- Harold Dewhurst v. Century Aluminum Company

Harold Dewhurst v. Century Aluminum Company

   Retiree benefits do not extend beyond the termination of the CBA where the agreement limits them  to the duration of the CBA.

   No error in Distract Court denial of preliminary injunciton.

   There is no legal presumption that benefits vest and continue - courts must interpret the contract.

    Employer need not reserve right in agreement to alter or terminate coverage for the coverage to terminate with the CBA.

    Language indicating that pension plan benefits vested does not indicate that health plan dose the same, even where pension plan is a condition precedent for health benefits.  It suggests the opposite - exclusio alterius.

  

Second Circuit -- United States v. Celaj

United States v. Celaj

    In this Hobbs Act prosecution, the required interstate commerce element was established by stipulation, which the deft now argues to be merely a generic statement of best marihuana practices.

  Jury could reasonably conclude from (1) stipulation that MJ is generally grown out of state and (2) deft's admission that he dealt MJ that the required jurisdictional de minimis effect on interstate commerce was proved.


  Although deft was never in the presence of attempted robbery victim, the planning was sufficient for NY "dangerous proximity" rule - concrete step beyond mere preparation.