(United States Ninth Circuit) - Affirmed the dismissal of a trademark infringement lawsuit brought by a financial services company, holding that the use of its trademarks by a publishing company constituted nominative fair use.

(United States Fifth Circuit) - Held that the First Amendment's commercial speech protections entitled a company to operate automotive service centers under the name "Tire Engineers," even though a state board that licenses engineers objected to the use of the profession's occupational title. Reversed and rendered summary judgment in favor of the company, in this declaratory judgment action.

(United States Fifth Circuit) - Remanded for recalculation of an attorney fee award in a trademark infringement action, in which one nonprofit organization accused another of stealing its logo. Both organizations endorse political candidates.

(United States Fifth Circuit) - In a contractual dispute over ownership of a trademark in a restaurant name, affirmed a bench trial decision in part and reversed it in part.

(United States Supreme Court) - Held that a bankrupt company's rejection of a trademark licensing agreement did not deprive its licensee of the rights to use the trademark. The U.S. Supreme Court interpreted Section 365 of the Bankruptcy Code, which enables a debtor to reject any executory contract, meaning a contract that neither party has finished performing. Justice Kagan delivered the opinion of the 8-1 Court.

(United States Seventh Circuit) - Addressed a damages issue in a case where a jury found that a musical instrument retailer infringed another retailer's trademark. Affirmed the denial of the plaintiff's motion amend the judgment.

(United States Seventh Circuit) - Held that a manufacturer of cellphone cases did not hold a valid trademark in the term CAPSULE. Affirmed a summary judgment in favor of the defendant in this trademark infringement lawsuit.

(United States Supreme Court) - Struck down a statutory provision that prohibits the registration of immoral or scandalous trademarks. An entrepreneur who founded a new clothing line filed a First Amendment challenge when the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office refused to register his desired trademark FUCT. The U.S. Supreme Court sided with him and invalidated a provision of the Lanham Act. Justice Kagan delivered the opinion of the Court, in which five other justices joined.

(United States Seventh Circuit) - Affirmed. Gatorade's use of the slogan "Gatorade The Sports Fuel Company" was fair use protected by the Lantham Act in a suit alleging trademark violations filed by SportsFuel.

(United States Second Circuit) - Affirmed in part, vacated and remanded in part. Finding no clear error in the district court’s determination that Defendant’s trademark infringement was willful, the award of gross profits was proper. However, the question of attorney’s fees and pre-judgement interest is remanded for further proceedings.

(United States Ninth Circuit) - Approved the Board of Immigration Appeals' practice of refusing to address arguments raised for the first time on appeal. Accordingly, denied a petition for review filed by an asylum seeker who had presented a new argument regarding particular social groups to the Board, which refused to consider it.

(United States Ninth Circuit) - Revived a Chinese citizen's claim for relief under the Convention Against Torture based on evidence that he is a practicing Christian and reports that Christians are persecuted and tortured in China. Granted his petition for review in relevant part and remanded to the Board of Immigration Appeals for further proceedings.

(California Court of Appeal) - Held that a criminal defendant who said he was never advised about the immigration consequences of his guilty plea was entitled to a hearing on whether to allow him to vacate his plea.

(United States Seventh Circuit) - Granted a lawful permanent resident's petition for review of a Board of Immigration Appeals decision. Held that his Illinois conviction for unlawful possession of several Xanax pills without a prescription did not render him removable.

(United States Fifth Circuit) - Rejected a Honduras national's claim that he was falsely imprisoned by federal immigration authorities. Affirmed summary judgment for the U.S.

(United States Fifth Circuit) - Held that the statute of limitations expired on a woman's action seeking the issuance of a certificate of citizenship. The five-year clock began running in 2008 when her first request for citizenship was denied. She was born in Mexico to an American father and a Mexican mother.

(United States Seventh Circuit) - Held that an immigration judge did not abuse her discretion by denying a continuance. The immigrant wanted to delay his removal hearing in order to seek lawful permanent residence status based on a brief marriage to a U.S. citizen that immigration authorities had already found to be a sham.

(United States Fifth Circuit) - In an immigration matter, held that a Honduran woman who prevailed on a petition for review was not entitled to recover attorney fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act. The government's position was substantially justified, in this case involving a perceived-homosexuality asylum claim.

(United States Ninth Circuit) - Denied an immigrant's petition for review of a removal decision, in a case involving specific immigration provisions affecting the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, which is a U.S. territory. The Philippines citizen had arrived there as a lawful guest worker.

(United States Ninth Circuit) - Granted an alien's petition for review of a removal decision. Held that Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents were not permitted to carry out preplanned mass detentions, interrogations and arrests at a factory without individualized reasonable suspicion. Remanded to the Board of Immigration Appeals with instructions to dismiss the Mexican citizen's removal proceeding without prejudice.

(United States DC Circuit) - In an immigration case, struck down as unconstitutional a federal policy that bars unaccompanied alien children in government custody who are pregnant from obtaining an abortion. Upheld a preliminary injunction in relevant part, in this class action.

(United States Fifth Circuit) - Affirmed a conviction for illegal reentry into the United States. Rejected the defendant's argument that his confession was admitted in violation of Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966).

(United States Seventh Circuit) - Held that an Iranian national may not appeal the revocation of his petition for conditional permanent residency. He had applied under the EB-5 admission category, which offers visas for immigrants who invest in new job-creating enterprises. Affirmed the ruling below, which concluded that Congress has stripped the courts of jurisdiction to review discretionary revocations of visa petitions.

(United States Second Circuit) - Upheld a Board of Immigration Appeals decision that a lawful permanent resident was ineligible for cancellation of removal. He had been found removable based on his New York convictions for endangering the welfare of a child. Denied the Irish citizen's petition for review.

(California Court of Appeal) - Reversed to allow withdrawal of guilty pleas. A new law was passed, Pen. Code Sec. 1473.7, that allowed a conviction to be vacated when there was no meaningful understanding of the immigration consequences of a guilty plea. The court held that there did not have to be proof of actual ineffective assistance of counsel, but merely a preponderance of the evidence.

(United States Fifth Circuit) - Vacated and complaint dismissed. Plaintiff sought declaratory judgment against Defendant, Homeland Security, claiming that DHS improperly denied application for legal permanent resident. Appellate court held that Plaintiff failed to state a legally cognizable claim.

(United States Fifth Circuit) - Deny petition for review. Plaintiff appealed dismissal of application for asylum and withholding of removal. Petition for stay of removal was granted, but denied the award of attorney fees. Plaintiff appealed the denial of attorney fees. Appeals court ruled that Plaintiff was not entitled to attorney fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act because the government’s actions were substantially justified.

(California Court of Appeal) - Affirmed denial of motion to vacate a conviction under penal Code Section 1473.7. Defendant contended that her trial counsel failed to property advise her of adverse immigration consequences of plea agreement. Appeals court held that the evidence did not support her contention.

(United States Second Circuit) - Granted. Petition for review of Board of Immigration Appeals decision denying Plaintiff application for asylum. Plaintiff demonstrated changed circumstances and BIA was required to consider entire application. Remand application to BIA for limited purpose of granting application.

(United States Fifth Circuit) - Affirmed. Defendant plead guilty to one count of transporting illegal aliens. He claimed district court erred by applying sentence enhancements. Appeals court found no error.

(United States Ninth Circuit) - Denied petition for review of Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) decision to remove Plaintiff from the United States. The appeals court held that Plaintiff's conviction for indecent exposure was a crime involving moral turpitude and held that the BIA decision in Matter of Cortes Medina applied retroactively to Plaintiff making him ineligible for cancellation of removal.

(United States Second Circuit) - Granted petition. Vacated removal order. Remanded. Plaintiff challenged denial of application for asylum. The immigration Judge denied application stating that it was not credible finding that there were inconsistencies in Plaintiff’s testimony. The Appeals court held that two of the purported inconsistent statements were not inconsistent at all and the third inconsistency did not justify an adverse ruling.

(United States Fifth Circuit) - Affirmed. Defendant, a Turkish national, was convicted for taking action to prevent his removal from the United States. While U.S. officers were escorting Defendant onto a flight to Turkey, he vigorously resisted the officers and the Airline refused to allow him to board because of his disruptive behavior.

(United States Seventh Circuit) - Consolidated petition for review. Motion to reconsider denied. Board of Immigration Appeals did not abuse its discretion in finding an immigration judge’s in absentia removal order appropriate, where defendant waited 10 years before filing the motion to reopen his proceedings and did not meet the standard for equitable tolling based on limited English proficiency, nor meet the requirements for a sua sponte request based on lack of notice and ineffective counsel.

(United States Ninth Circuit) - Petition for review of Board of Immigration decision denied, where Defendant could not show legal or constitutional reasons to provide court the jurisdiction to review the BIA’s denial of sua sponte reopening.

(United States Ninth Circuit) - Reversed and remanded. An ambiguous record regarding a state law conviction does not constitute a predicate offense that would bar eligibility for a cancellation of removal, overruling Young v. Holder, where Petitioner argued previous conviction for conspiracy to commit a felony did not reference a specific controlled substance.

(United States Fifth Circuit) - Denied in part, dismissed in part. A Haitian national's petition for review of a Board of Immigration Appeals denial of asylum and cancellation of removal was dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. His arguments that the court lacked jurisdiction and violated due process were denied.

(United States Ninth Circuit) - Petition for review of Board of Immigration Appeals’ denial of a motion to reopen removal proceedings based on ineffective counsel granted in part and denied in part. BIA applied a “clear probability” standard, rather than a “more likely than not” standard, when considering protection under the Convention Against Torture Act. Remanded to district court.

(United States Seventh Circuit) - Petition for review denied. Nothing in N.Y.C.C.’s record required the immigration judge or Board of Immigration Appeals to conclude past persecution or reasonable fear of future persecution, where Petitioner could not show that she was unable to leave her abusive relationship, nor prove that she was the mother of a cartel member’s child.

(United States Fifth Circuit) - Petition for review denied. An in absentia order of removal could not be overturned because it was not capricious, without foundation in the evidence, or otherwise so irrational it was arbitrary.

(United States Ninth Circuit) - Petition denied. Plaintiff petitioned for review of Board of Immigration Appeals decision for removal based on a judgment for Contempt of Court for violating a restraining order.

(United States Ninth Circuit) - Reversed a misdemeanor conviction for eluding examination or inspection by immigration officers in violation of 18 USC section 1325. Held that an alien that crosses into this country at a non-designated place of entry is not guilty of eluding examination, because such conduct must occur at a designated examination place.

(California Court of Appeal) - Affirmed. The trial court denied Defendant’s motion to vacate his plea of no contest to assault with a firearm. Defendant claimed that his counsel did not inform him of the consequences of such a plea on his immigration status. The appeals court found no prejudicial error and that Defendant had failed to show evidence that his plea was legally invalid.

(United States Fifth Circuit) - Affirmed. A trio of co-conspirators who participated in a scheme to marry Nigerian nationals to obtain immigration status were properly convicted and sentenced for their plot.

(United States Ninth Circuit) - Petition for review denied. Defendant's conviction for “strangulation” was categorically a crime of violence making him removable and ineligible for asylum; substantial evidence supported the Board of Immigration’s denial of withholding of removal and relief.

(United States Fifth Circuit) - Affirmed. A sentence imposed on a man for illegal reentry to the US was affirmed. An upward variance at sentencing that considered the facts of an unrelated case and his need for treatment for alcoholism was not in error.

(United States Fifth Circuit) - Reversed and remanded. The dismissal of an indictment for illegal entry following removal was reversed because while the appeal was pending the court issued an opinion in an analogous case foreclosing the defendant's arguments.

(United States Ninth Circuit) - Affirmed. The panel held that the issue of whether Plaintiff was inadmissible on terrorism-related grounds was not actually litigated in his asylum proceedings and, therefore, issue preclusion did not apply to his adjustment of status proceedings.

(United States DC Circuit) - Reversed. Plaintiffs offered the chance to apply for a select number of diversity visas that were never granted and whose statutory deadline had passed did not have a moot claim because the district court retained the authority to potentially award relief.

(United States Ninth Circuit) - Petition denied. Finding that solicitation of a crime as serious as possession of at least four pounds of marijuana was as turpitudinous as the crime itself, the panel denied Romo’s petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ determination that she was inadmissible.