opinion and polls

US v. Zukerman

(United States Second Circuit) - Affirmed an investment firm founder's sentence for tax evasion. After pleading guilty, the firm founder was sentenced to prison and also ordered to pay restitution and a $10 million fine. On appeal, he challenged the fine, which was far higher than the amount recommended in his plea agreement. However, the Second Circuit saw no reason to overturn his sentence in any respect.



  • Criminal Law & Procedure
  • Sentencing
  • White Collar Crime

opinion and polls

U.S. v. Sampson

(United States Second Circuit) - Reinstated federal embezzlement charges against a foreclosure referee who was also formerly a New York state senator. The defendant argued that the charges against him for allegedly embezzling escrowed funds from sales of foreclosed properties should be dismissed because the five-year statute of limitations on the offense had run. On appeal, the Second Circuit agreed with prosecutors that the district court should not have granted the defendant's motion to dismiss the charges as time-barred.



  • Criminal Law & Procedure
  • White Collar Crime
  • Elections

opinion and polls

US v. Acevedo-Hernandez

(United States First Circuit) - Affirmed the conviction and sentence of a former Puerto Rico superior court judge for receiving bribes and participating in a conspiracy to bribe an agent of an organization receiving federal funds. On appeal, the former judge cited a number of alleged trial and sentencing errors, including the upholding of a witness's invocation of his Fifth Amendment privilege. However, the First Circuit found no reversible error and affirmed.



  • Criminal Law & Procedure
  • Judges & Judiciary
  • White Collar Crime

opinion and polls

US v. Burfoot

(United States Fourth Circuit) - Affirmed the conviction of a Norfolk, Virginia, city council member for wire fraud, extortion under color of official right, conspiracy to commit such offenses, and two counts of perjury. The charges stemmed from the council member's solicitation of bribes from local real estate developers. He raised various substantive and procedural challenges to his conviction, but the Fourth Circuit found no merit in them and affirmed.



  • White Collar Crime
  • Criminal Law & Procedure

opinion and polls

Heidary v. Superior Court (the People)

(California Court of Appeal) - Held that the superior court did not err in denying a motion to set aside an indictment. The defendant in this case alleging that medical clinics fraudulently billed insurance companies argued that the indictment failed to provide constitutionally adequate notice of the charges against him and also improperly aggregated multiple acts into single counts. Rejecting his arguments, the Fourth Appellate District held that there was no basis for issuing a writ of prohibition directing the indictment to be set aside.



  • White Collar Crime
  • Criminal Law & Procedure

opinion and polls

US v. Valdes-Ayala

(United States First Circuit) - Affirmed the fraud-related convictions of a man who falsely promised to provide professional legal assistance to individuals who were behind on their court-ordered child support payments. On appeal, the defendant made several claims of trial and sentencing error. The First Circuit affirmed his convictions and the order of restitution but remanded for resentencing using the proper version of the Guidelines Manual.



  • Criminal Law & Procedure
  • Sentencing
  • White Collar Crime

opinion and polls

US v. Dickerson

(United States Fifth Circuit) - Affirmed the conviction and sentence of a law firm office manager for participating in a scheme to defraud insurance companies by submitting client claims for fraudulent chiropractic treatments. The conviction was for conspiracy and mail fraud.



  • Criminal Law & Procedure
  • Sentencing
  • White Collar Crime

opinion and polls

People v. Franco

(Supreme Court of California) - Interpreted Proposition 47, a recent initiative measure that makes certain types of forgery misdemeanors if the value of the forged instrument does not exceed $950. Held that the amount written on a forged check establishes its value for this purpose. Resolved a split in the courts of appeal regarding how to determine the value of a forged check.



  • White Collar Crime
  • Criminal Law & Procedure

opinion and polls

US v. Balsiger

(United States Seventh Circuit) - Affirmed a businessperson's conviction and sentence on wire fraud and conspiracy charges stemming from a scheme to defraud manufacturers that issue coupons for consumer products. He had headed one of the nation's largest coupon processing companies.



  • Criminal Law & Procedure
  • Sentencing
  • White Collar Crime

opinion and polls

US v. Kuczora

(United States Seventh Circuit) - Affirmed the prison sentence of a defendant who pleaded guilty to wire fraud for stealing from unwary investors who sought his help in securing millions of dollars in financing.



  • Criminal Law & Procedure
  • Sentencing
  • White Collar Crime

opinion and polls

US v. Maclin

(United States Seventh Circuit) - Affirmed a conviction for Medicaid theft, in a case where a billing manager embezzled payments that belonged to medical practice.



  • Health Law
  • White Collar Crime
  • Criminal Law & Procedure

opinion and polls

US v. Boliaux

(United States Seventh Circuit) - Affirmed a used-car dealer's conviction for wire fraud and bank fraud in connection with his business dealings with secured lenders. Rejected his arguments regarding the sufficiency of the evidence.



  • White Collar Crime
  • Criminal Law & Procedure

opinion and polls

US v. Garcia De Nieto

(United States Fifth Circuit) - Affirmed a woman's convictions arising out of an identity theft scheme that she conducted from her home in Mexico.



  • White Collar Crime
  • Criminal Law & Procedure

opinion and polls

US v. Anieze-Smith

(United States Ninth Circuit) - Affirmed a restitution order imposed against an owner of a medical supply company who was convicted of Medicare fraud. Held that she could be ordered to pay restitution even for losses resulting in part from conduct occurring outside the statute of limitations.



  • Health Law
  • White Collar Crime
  • Criminal Law & Procedure

opinion and polls

People v. Astorga-Lider

(California Court of Appeal) - Affirmed an order declaring a deed of trust void, in a case where a woman pleaded guilty to grand theft for encumbering a married couple's real property with a fraudulent deed of trust.



  • White Collar Crime
  • Property Law & Real Estate
  • Criminal Law & Procedure

opinion and polls

US v. Seng Yong

(United States Ninth Circuit) - On an issue of first impression, addressed the standard for determining the voluntariness of guilty pleas obtained through offers of leniency for third parties. Held that a man's guilty plea was voluntary even if it was made in exchange for leniency for his son, in this prosecution involving the operation of an unlawful sports betting operation.



  • White Collar Crime
  • Criminal Law & Procedure

opinion and polls

People v. Pierce

(California Court of Appeal) - Affirmed. Defendant, a chiropractor, was convicted of charges stemming from a scheme to defraud workers’ compensation insurance carriers. On appeal, Defendant claimed several errors at trial including a sentencing error. The appeals court found no abuse of discretion or prejudicial error.




opinion and polls

ZUP, LLC v. Nash Manufacturing, Inc.

(United States Federal Circuit) - Affirmed that a patent for a water recreational board was invalid as obvious. On appeal, the patent holder argued that its invention of a recreational board that would help athletically challenged people ride on the water was not obvious. In a 2-1 decision, the Federal Circuit disagreed and affirmed the district court decision granting summary judgment to the defendant in this patent infringement action.




opinion and polls

Trustees of Boston University v. Everlight Electronics Co., Ltd.

(United States Federal Circuit) - Held that a patent claim relating to light-emitting diodes was invalid because it did not meet the enablement requirement. After a jury found that the defendants had infringed Boston University's patent, the defendants appealed on the ground that the patent was invalid because it did not adequately teach the public how to make and use the invention. Agreeing with this argument, the Federal Circuit held that the defendants were entitled to judgment as a matter of law.




opinion and polls

Excelled Sheepskin and Leather Coat Corp. v. Oregon Brewing Co.

(United States Second Circuit) - Reversed summary judgment for an apparel company in its trademark infringement action. A company that sold leather jackets branded ROGUE contended that a commercial brewery that sold ROGUE-branded beer had infringed its trademark by using the name on t‐shirts and hats. The Second Circuit held that the apparel company was not entitled to summary judgment, because the brewery was the senior user and the evidence did not show that it was precluded by laches.




opinion and polls

GoPro, Inc. v. Contour IP Holding, LLC

(United States Federal Circuit) - Vacated and remanded the Patent Board's prior ruling against plaintiff which had filed suit to challenge the defendant’s proposed patent. In vacating and remanding, the Appellate court ruled that plaintiff’s printed catalog was prior art and that the defendant’s proposed patent could have been based on information in that catalog and that the trial court had not properly considered the catalog in making its finding.




opinion and polls

Gordon v. Drape Creative, Inc.

(United States Ninth Circuit) - Held that greeting-card companies were not entitled to summary judgment against a trademark infringement suit. The companies insisted that they did not violate the Lanham Act by producing greeting cards that contained phrases similar to one trademarked by a comedy writer who had posted a popular YouTube video known for its catchphrase Honey Badger Don't Care. However, the Ninth Circuit found genuine issues of material fact, and thus reversed and remanded for further proceedings on the comedy writer's claims.




opinion and polls

Advantek Marketing, Inc. v. Shanghai Walk-Long Tools Co., Ltd.

(United States Federal Circuit) - Reinstated a patent infringement claim relating to a design for a portable animal kennel. The patent owner insisted it should not be estopped by prosecution history from asserting its infringement claim against a competitor. Agreeing that estoppel did not apply, the Federal Circuit reversed the district court's judgment on the pleadings and remanded for further proceedings.




opinion and polls

JTEKT Corp. v. GKN Automotive Ltd.

(United States Federal Circuit) - Dismissed an appeal from an inter partes review decision on grounds that the patent challenger lacked Article III standing. The challenger asserted that the patentee's claims for a motor vehicle drivetrain were invalid. On appeal, the Federal Circuit held that the challenger lacked standing because it had not established an actual injury; in particular, it had no product on the market or any concrete plans for future activity that would likely cause the patentee to complain of infringement.




opinion and polls

BSG Tech LLC v. BuySeasons, Inc

(United States Federal Circuit) - Affirmed. Plaintiff sued defendant for infringement of several patents related to systems and methods for indexing information stored in wide access databases. The district court agreed with the defendant and held all asserted claims invalid as ineligible under 35 U.S.C. section 101.




opinion and polls

Core Wireless Licensing v. Apple, Inc.

(United States Federal Circuit) - Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and vacated in part. Plaintiff brought a patent infringement action. A jury found that the defendant infringed on both asserted claims and that neither claim was invalid. The Federal Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed some of plaintiff’s infringement claims, but stated that plaintiff’s theory of infringement of other claims was inadequate to support the judgment of infringement and therefore reversed on that claim.




opinion and polls

In re Maatita

(United States Federal Circuit) - Held that a patent application covering the design of an athletic shoe bottom should not have been rejected. The applicant argued that the patent claim met the enablement and definiteness requirements even though it used a single two-dimensional plan-view drawing to disclose the shoe bottom design. Agreeing that a designer of ordinary skill in the art would be able to make comparisons for infringement purposes, the Federal Circuit reversed the Patent Trial and Appeal Board's rejection of the patent claim.




opinion and polls

ABS Entertainment, Inc. v. CBS Corp.

(United States Ninth Circuit) - Reinstated claims for violation of California law copyrights possessed in certain musical performance sound recordings. The plaintiff copyright holders argued that their decision to remaster their pre-1972 analog sound recordings onto digital formats did not bring the remastered sound recordings exclusively under the ambit of federal law. Agreeing with the plaintiffs that their state law copyright claims were not preempted, the Ninth Circuit reversed the entry of summary judgment for the defendant radio broadcasters.




opinion and polls

Scholz v. Goudreau

(United States First Circuit) - Denied both parties' appeals in a trademark lawsuit between two members of the rock band Boston. A member of the multi-platinum band sued the band's former guitarist for trademark infringement and breach of contract in a dispute over the wording of public statements about the guitarist's former role in the band. At trial, the jury rejected all of the plaintiff's claims and all of the defendant's counterclaims. Both sides appealed, and the First Circuit affirmed.




opinion and polls

Zheng CAI v. Diamond Hong, Inc.

(United States Federal Circuit) - Affirmed the decision of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s decision cancelling registration of plaintiff’s trademark for a green tea product due to the likelihood of confusion with defendant’s registered mark.




opinion and polls

Ericsson Inc. v. Intellectual Ventures I, LLC

(United States Federal Circuit) - Vacated and remanded a decision of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Appeals Board (PTO Board) that certain claims relating to a wireless communications system are not patentable. In vacating and remanding, the Federal Circuit reasoned that the PTO Board did not consider portions of plaintiff’s reply.




opinion and polls

Cobbler Nevada, LLC v. Gonzales

(United States Ninth Circuit) - Affirmed the dismissal of a copyright infringement action brought against an individual who allegedly downloaded and distributed (i.e., pirated) a movie through peer-to-peer BitTorrent networks. The individual argued that he was not liable for infringement even if the infringing Internet Protocol (IP) address was his, because multiple individuals could connect via his IP address. Agreeing with him and noting that he operated an adult foster care home, the Ninth Circuit held that the complaint failed to state a claim of either direct or contributory infringement.




opinion and polls

Tanksley v. Daniels

(United States Third Circuit) - Affirmed the dismissal of a TV producer's complaint alleging that the popular Fox Television series Empire infringed his copyright in a television pilot he had created a decade earlier. Moving to dismiss, the defendants contended that there was no substantial similarity between the two television shows. Agreeing, the Third Circuit affirmed the dismissal of the complaint.




opinion and polls

Intellectual Ventures I LLC v. T-Mobile USA, Inc.

(United States Federal Circuit) - Reinstated a patent infringement claim upon finding that the district court's grant of summary judgment resulted from an erroneous claim construction. The patentee accused several telecommunications companies of infringing its patent for an application-aware resource allocator. On appeal, the Federal Circuit agreed with the patentee that the district court construed the patent incorrectly. The panel vacated in relevant part and remanded.




opinion and polls

Worlds Inc. v. Bungie, Inc.

(United States Federal Circuit) - Vacated Patent Trial and Appeal Board decisions invalidating three patents relating to videogame software. The patentee contended that the petitions for inter partes review were time-barred because an alleged real party in interest had been served with a complaint alleging infringement over one year prior to the IPRs' filing dates. Finding possible merit in this argument, the Federal Circuit vacated and remanded for further proceedings.




opinion and polls

Orexo AB v. Actavis Elizabeth LLC

(United States Federal Circuit) - Reversed a judgment that a patent for a pharmaceutical product was invalid on the ground of obviousness. The Federal Circuit concluded that obviousness was not proved by clear and convincing evidence.




opinion and polls

IXI IP, LLC v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.

(United States Federal Circuit) - Affirmed that certain patent claims relating to a wireless networking device were invalid as obvious. The Federal Circuit affirmed the Patent Trial and Appeal Board in an inter partes review proceeding.




opinion and polls

University of California v. Broad Institute, Inc.

(United States Federal Circuit) - Affirmed a judgment of no interference-in-fact in a patent case involving the CRISPR-Cas9 system for the targeted cutting of DNA molecules. The Federal Circuit found no error in the Patent Trial and Appeal Board's conclusion of no interference-in-fact, in this case pitting the Broad Institute, Inc., Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and others against the University of California, the University of Vienna, and others.




opinion and polls

Acorda Therapeutics, Inc. v. Roxane Laboratories, Inc.

(United States Federal Circuit) - Affirmed that a pharmaceutical company's patent claims in a multiple sclerosis drug were invalid for obviousness. Several competitors seeking to market a generic version of the same drug raised the issue of obviousness when the company sued them for infringement. In a 2-1 decision, the Federal Circuit affirmed that the patent claims in question were invalid.




opinion and polls

In re: Detroit Athletic Co.

(United States Federal Circuit) - Affirmed the refusal to register the trademark DETROIT ATHLETIC CO. for sports apparel retail services because it was likely to be confused with DETROIT ATHLETIC CLUB for clothing goods. The Federal Circuit affirmed the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board's ruling.




opinion and polls

ParkerVision, Inc. v. Qualcomm Inc.

(United States Federal Circuit) - Affirmed that some, but not all, claims in a telecommunications patent were unpatentable as obvious. Finding no error, the Federal Circuit affirmed the determinations made in an review.




opinion and polls

Nobel Biocare Services AG v. Instradent USA, Inc.

(United States Federal Circuit) - A company appealed from the determination in an inter partes review that certain claims of its patent directed to dental implants were unpatentable. Affirming, the Federal Circuit concluded that the Patent Trial and Appeal Board did not err in its anticipation finding.




opinion and polls

Plixer International, Inc. v. Scrutinizer GMBH

(United States First Circuit) - Held that the exercise of specific personal jurisdiction over a German company in a trademark infringement action did not violate due process. The German company, which operated an English-language website, argued that it lacked the requisite minimum contacts with the United States. Disagreeing, the First Circuit affirmed the district court's ruling that the exercise of personal jurisdiction was constitutional.




opinion and polls

Skidmore v. Led Zeppelin

(United States Ninth Circuit) - Granted a new trial in a copyright case involving a claim that Led Zeppelin copied key portions of its hit Stairway to Heaven from a song written by a musician named Randy Wolfe. Held that several jury instructions were erroneous and prejudicial, including the instructions on originality, and thus vacated the jury's verdict of no infringement.




opinion and polls

Brand Services, LLC v. Irex Corp.

(United States Fifth Circuit) - Revived an industrial scaffolding company's claim that a former employee stole trade secrets and confidential information when he went to work for a competitor. Reversed the entry of summary judgment for the competitor on the company's Louisiana Uniform Trade Secrets Act claim and common law conversion claim, in relevant part.




opinion and polls

Wilson v. Dynatone Publishing Co.

(United States Second Circuit) - Held that a copyright ownership claim was timely filed. The statute of limitations was not triggered by the defendants' act of registering their competing claim of ownership in the Copyright Office. Denied a petition for rehearing, in a dispute over ownership of renewal term copyrights in certain musical compositions and sound records.




opinion and polls

Hyatt v. Office of Management and Budget

(United States Ninth Circuit) - Held that an individual could obtain judicial review of the federal government's denial of his petition under the Paperwork Reduction Act, which authorizes individuals to petition for a determination of whether they must provide information requested by a government agency. Reversed and remanded for further proceedings in the district court, in a case involving information collected by the Patent and Trademark Office.




opinion and polls

Gordon v. Drape Creative, Inc.

(United States Ninth Circuit) - In an amended opinion, held that greeting-card companies were not entitled to summary judgment against a trademark infringement suit. The companies insisted they did not violate the Lanham Act by selling greeting cards that contained phrases similar to one trademarked by a comedy writer. However, the Ninth Circuit found genuine issues of material fact, and thus reversed and remanded for further proceedings on the comedy writer's claims.




opinion and polls

Seventh Avenue, Inc. v. Shaf International, Inc.

(United States Seventh Circuit) - Affirmed that a corporation was in contempt of a consent judgment because its outside counsel failed to respond to a motion alleging a violation of the judgment and to appear at a hearing on the motion, in a trademark infringement case.




opinion and polls

Capitol Records, LLC v. ReDigi Inc.

(United States Second Circuit) - Affirmed a finding of copyright infringement, in a lawsuit that involved copyrighted music recordings resold through an internet platform. The suit was brought by several record companies.