Federal Circuit -- PRESIDIO COMPONENTS V. AMERICAN TECHNICAL CERAMICS

No error in finding of infringement, as a substantially monolithic component might not be entirely monolithic.

Substantial evidence for lost profits finding.

Finding of no competition  for purposes of irreparable harm conflicts with finding of competition for purposes of damage award.

Error in denial of injunction.

As amendments to the statute apply retroactively, plaintiff has no cause of action.



PRESIDIO COMPONENTS V. AMERICAN TECHNICAL CERAMICS

Federal Circuit -- IN RE MARSHA FOX

No error in denial of registration of mark with obscene double entendre.

IN RE MARSHA FOX

Eleventh Circuit -- Sovereign Military Hospitaller Order of Saint John of Jerusalem of Rhodes and of Malta v. The Florida Friory of the Knights Hospitallers of the Sovereign Order of Saint John of Jerusalem, Knights of Malta, the Ecumenical Order

No fraud on the PTO, given the subjective good faith of the signer.

Visual similarity of marks cannot be the only criterion in Langham Act confusion of marks claim.

Harmless error in allowing lay witness to testify as to historical matters.

Trial court shouldn't have looked things up on the internet.

(Bonus: citation to the Henrican Act of Supremacy)

Sovereign Military Hospitaller Order of Saint John of Jerusalem of Rhodes and of Malta v. The Florida Friory of the Knights Hospitallers of the Sovereign Order of Saint John of Jerusalem, Knights of Malta, the Ecumenical Order

Eleventh Circuit -- Angela Harris, et al. v. Liberty Community Management, Inc.

Management company's collection of debts for the homeowners association was incidental to the fiduciary relationship ad therefore not covered under FCRA.

No violation of state statute.

Angela Harris, et al. v. Liberty Community Management, Inc.

Tenth Circuit -- Schwartz v. Booker

No error in denial of qualified immunity, as state incurs special relationship with foster child at placement, making all subsequent state actors liable.

Sufficient evidence for abdication of duty.  Right was clearly established.



Schwartz v. Booker

Tenth Circuit -- The Estate of B.I.C. v. Gillen

Error for District Court to grant qualified immunity to social worker in death of abused child, as state-created danger exception applies.

Given preponderance of facts, social worker should have known that she was violating clearly established law.

No specific intent to interfere with familial relationships, so no claims under Due Process.

Claim accrues with the death, not with the conduct.

Concurrence: Right, but inaction can't be considered affirmative conduct.


The Estate of B.I.C. v. Gillen

Tenth Circuit -- Fireman's Fund v. Thyssen Mining Construction

Joint venture partner's acts in the forum were not taken in furtherance of the company's interests, therefore not enough minimum contacts for personal jurisdiction.

As Canadian courts might bar the claim, dismissal under forum non conveniens was erroneous.

Fireman's Fund v. Thyssen Mining Construction

Ninth Circuit -- METRO ONE TELECOMMUNICATIONS, V. CIR

Net operating losses can't be applied to previous years' taxes.

Legislative intent, plain meaning.

METRO ONE TELECOMMUNICATIONS, V. CIR

Eighth Circuit -- United States v. Marc Engelmann

Court erred in denying evidentiary hearing on whether sequestration violation justified new trial.

Dissent: Nope.

United States  v.  Marc Engelmann

Seventh Circuit -- Norman Bernstein v. Patricia Banker

Environmental statute (CERCLA) limits claimants to a contribution claim when both a contribution claim and a recovery claim are possible.

The claim accrues not on the execution of the settlement agreement, but upon the performance of the consideration required by the agreement.

No abuse of discretion in not striking argument in summary reply brief, as it had been raised earlier.

Where they contradict, SOL derives from the type of claim, not the provisions of the statute.

Given a series of cleanup orders, the claim accrues separately with each order.

Conditional cross-appeal will lie despite finding in the party's favor at trial, as the conditional cross-appeal sought dismissal with prejudice.

Despite overlapping facts, the issues are too different for issue & claim preclusion.

Norman Bernstein v. Patricia Banker

Seventh Circuit -- USA v. Blazej Wasilewski

No error in imposing position-of-trust sentencing bump for a bank's assistant branch manager's embezzlement of 40K.

Court's expressed regret at sentence length was not a statement that it viewed the guidelines range as mandatory.

USA v. Blazej Wasilewski

Sixth Circuit -- Arthur Bell v. Carol Howes

Attorney not mentioning potentially exculpatory evidence at trial is not in itself proof that the information wasn't disclosed.  Habeas reversed, as the events are not therefore an unreasonable application of Brady.

Existence of undisclosed principal insufficient to toll AEDPA under actual innocence claim.

Arthur Bell v. Carol Howes

Sixth Circuit -- Dennis Freudeman v. Landing of Canton

No error in res ipsa jury instruction, as the medication wrongly taken was within the exclusive control of the nursing home.

Hostile cross by the court did not reflect egregious bias.

No error in jury instruction on punitive damages.

Statutory cap on punitive damages as percentage of total award does not include damages from wrongful death claim.

Dennis Freudeman v. Landing of Canton

Fifth Circuit -- Dennis Melancon, et al v. City of New Orleans, et

Freely revocable taxi licenses are not a cognizable property interest under Louisiana law, despite the existence of a secondary market.

Licensing by the city or the state is not the extension of a contractual offer. Hence, no impairment of contract by subsequent modification of regulatory scheme.

Taxi upgrade ordinances do not present irreparable injury sufficient for an injunction.

Dennis Melancon, et al v. City of New Orleans, et

Fifth Circuit -- Netsphere, Inc. v. Jeffrey Baron

If a litigant allegedly tries to frustrate bankruptcy proceedings by repeatedly retaining new counsel, the court cannot attempt to control this by putting all of his personal assets into receivership.  

No evidence that property was being moved outside of the court's jurisdiction.

Fees of the recievership (probably mostly) to the deft, though, as it's an equitable call, and move was good-faith reaction to the deft's improper acts.
 

Netsphere, Inc. v. Jeffrey Baron

Fourth Circuit -- US v. Carter Tillery

Theft of $40 from dry cleaners satisfies Hobbs Act robbery jurisdictional predicate, as it depleted the assets of an interstate business.

Sufficient evidence, given the witness ID.

Jury instructions asking for unanimous verdict in order to avert mistrial don't violate rule against court inquiring into the vote.

Intentional flight form law enforcement counts as violent crime for sentencing.

US v. Carter Tillery

Fourth Circuit -- Kay Butler v. US

Agency benefits award has no preclusive effect on plaintiff's subsequent Article III FTCA action.  The statute says that the agency determination binds all claims to the agency, not claims against it.

Kay Butler v. US

Second Circuit -- Longman v. Wachovia Bank, N.A.

No private right of action in FCRA provision.

Trial court did not abuse discretion in denying leave to amend the complaint.


Longman v. Wachovia Bank, N.A.

Second Circuit -- Olin Corp. v. Am. Home Assurance Co.

Single seepage across many years is a single occurrence as defined in the contract.  Seepage that continues after the coverage period of the contract therefore results in liability where the contract provides for coverage of post-contractual damages from harms within the time of the contract.

Provisions barring coverage where prior insurance exists are not triggered until prior lower-level policies exhaust their limits.



Olin Corp. v. Am. Home Assurance Co.

Second Circuit -- Bacolitsas v. 86th and 3rd Owner, LLC

Interstate Land Sales Full Disclosure Act mandates that the description of the lot be sufficient for recordation, not that the document itself be capable of recordation.  Harmless error in the description of the condo being sold is therefore not grounds for rescission of the sale.

Bacolitsas v. 86th and 3rd Owner, LLC