Mazda Motor Corp has sought loans totalling about 300 billion yen ($2.8 billion) from Japan's three megabanks and other lenders to ride out the coronavirus epidemic, a source with direct knowledge of the matter said on Saturday. The megabanks - Mitsubishi UFJ Financial Group, Sumitomo Mitsui Financial Group and Mizuho Financial Group - along with the Development Bank of Japan, Sumitomo Mitsui Trust Holdings and others are set to agree, with some already having extended the loans, the person said, declining to be identified because the information is not public.

(California Court of Appeal) - In a case where a creditor sought to collect a judgment, held that California's Uniform Voidable Transactions Act may apply to a fraudulent agreement between spouses to prevent collection of the debt. The debtor's premarital agreement here said that each spouse's earnings and other property acquired during marriage would not become community property.

(California Court of Appeal) - Held that a domestic violence restraining order could not constitutionally prohibit a husband from posting anything about his divorce case on Facebook. Directed that the provision be stricken from the restraining order as an invalid restraint on speech.

(California Court of Appeal) - Affirmed an order requiring a woman to pay $10,000 in sanctions to her ex-husband in a marital dissolution proceeding.

(United States Ninth Circuit) - In a suit brought by two nonprofit veterans organizations against the Department of Veterans Affairs, the Ninth Circuit en banc holds: 1) the district court lacked jurisdiction to reach the plaintiffs' statutory and due process challenges to alleged delays in the provision of mental health care and to the absence of procedures to challenge such delays; 2) the district court lacked jurisdiction to reach the plaintiffs' claims related to delays in the adjudication of service-related disability benefits; 3) the district court had jurisdiction to consider the plaintiffs' challenges to the alleged inadequacy of the procedures at the regional office level; and 4) the district court properly exercised that jurisdiction to deny the plaintiffs' claim on the merits.

(United States First Circuit) - In a dispute between two monasteries for copyright infringement of a religious text, district court's judgment in favor of the plaintiff is affirmed, as the plaintiff has established both elements of an infringement claim of actual copying and actionable copying, and all of the defenses set forth by the defendant are without merit.

(United States Ninth Circuit) - In a religious organization's suit against a subdivision of a national anarchist group under the federal Freedom of Access to Clinic Entrances Act and common law trespass, district court's sanction order granting attorneys' fees and costs to non-parties, which followed the quashing of a subpoena seeking identifying information for seven e-mail account holders, is reversed where Rule 45(c)(1) cannot properly support a sanction where the cost of complying with the subpoena is minimal and there is no showing that the subpoena was facially defective or issued in bad faith.

(California Court of Appeal) - Judgment quieting title of disputed property to plaintiff is affirmed, where: 1) defendant nonprofit religious organization's status as a "public benefit corporation" does not make it a "public entity" immune from adverse possession under Civil Code section 1007; 2) a nonprofit religious organization's "welfare exemption" from property taxes means that no such taxes were "levied and assessed" on the property during the years it qualified for the exemption; and thus, 3) under the plain and binding language of Code of Civil Procedure Code section 325, the adverse possessor is consequently excused from the usual requirement that he pay taxes on the disputed land for five years.

(United States Ninth Circuit) - In this case, the district court's judgment in favor of defendants Federal National Mortgage Association and Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation, finding them statutorily exempt from state and local taxation of real property transfers and finding that Congress had the constitutional authority to exempt defendants from such taxation, is affirmed, where: 1) the transfer taxes at issue here are excise taxes, and the statutory carve-outs allowing for taxation of real property encompass only property taxes, not excise taxes; 2) because Congress had power under the Commerce Clause to regulate the secondary mortgage market, it had power under the Necessary and Proper Clause to ensure the preservation of defendant organizations by exempting them from state and local taxes; and 3) the exemptions do not violate the Tenth Amendment.

(United States First Circuit) - In a suit alleging contract and intellectual property claims against a variety of companies affiliated with Sony Music Entertainment, concerning an original song and music video that plaintiff submitted to Sony as part of a songwriting contest sponsored by Sony, the District Court's dismissal of all claims and order compelling arbitration are affirmed where: 1) the claims were subject to mandatory arbitration under the Federal Arbitration Act; and 2) plaintiff failed to allege facts sufficient to support his claims under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6).

(United States Fourth Circuit) - Affirming the district court's rejection of First Amendment violation claims brought by an exotic dancing venue complaining that a city regulates sexually oriented businesses differently than it does mainstream performances such as ballets and concerts, that the law violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment by barring 18 to 21 year olds from owning sexually oriented businesses, but finding that the district court erred in rejecting a claim that the denial provisions of the licensing regulation are an unconstitutional prior restraint, striking this provision from the Ordinance and remanding to consider its severability.

(United States Second Circuit) - Reversed the denial of a post-trial JMOL motion. In overturning a $1.3 million jury verdict, the appeals court held that a business owner failed to prove that two prosecutors and an investigator in the Nassau County District Attorney's Office tortiously interfered with his contracts in violation of New York law when they conducted a fraud investigation against a media company he owned but then did not ultimately file charges against him. The appeals court concluded that there was no evidence that anyone stopped performing under a specific contract because of anything said or done by the defendants.

(United States Ninth Circuit) - Reinstated a lawsuit alleging that a movie studio breached its collective-bargaining agreement with musicians who score motion pictures. The musicians' labor union contended that the movie studio breached the labor agreement by having the film Same Kind of Different As Me scored in Slovakia, rather than hiring union musicians in the U.S. and Canada. Finding genuine disputes of material fact, the Ninth Circuit reversed the entry of summary judgment for the movie studio and remanded for further proceedings.

(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.

(California Court of Appeal) - Held that a rock star's decision to terminate his drummer implicated free speech rights. The fired drummer alleged that he was let go because of his age, disability or medical condition. Concluding that the rock star's decision was protected conduct, the California Court of Appeal reversed and remanded for further proceedings on the 80s-era star's (Eddie Money) anti-SLAPP motion.

(United States Federal Circuit) - In a petition for cancellation of a trademark, brought by the owner of the INSIGNIA mark used to sell wines since 1978 against the registrant of the ALEC BRADLEY STAR INSIGNIA mark used for cigars and cigar products, the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board's denial of the petition is vacated and remanded for reconsideration where: 1) the Board erred in its legal analysis, in analyzing the 'fame' of INSIGNIA wine as an all-or-nothing factor, and discounting it entirely in reaching the conclusion of no likelihood of confusion as to source, contrary to law and precedent; and 2) as a result of this error, the Board did not properly apply the totality of the circumstances standard, which requires considering all the relevant factors on a scale appropriate to their merits.

(United States Second Circuit) - Affirming the district court's determination that New York law allows for derivative litigation rights in a suit on Lanham Act claims and a motion for preliminary injunction under the first-filed rule, but vacating the dismissal of the complaint and injunction motion in favor of a first-filed Georgia action because the Georgia suit was transferred to New York, so the reasoning behind the first-filed ruling no longer pertains, and affirming the district court's award of costs, including attorney fees incurred in the Georgia state action.

(United States Ninth Circuit) - Reversing the district court's summary judgment in favor of the defendant in a suit for trademark infringement relating to foam earplugs in a specific bright green color used by the plaintiffs in their earplugs because the district court's conclusion that the green color mark was functional and therefore not protectable as trade dress was in error. The existence or nonexistence of alternative designs is probative of functionality or nonfunctionality and a genuine issue of fact regarding whether the color was functional remained.

(United States First Circuit) - Reversed the order to dismiss the plaintiff's copyright and trademark claims stemming from a songwriting contest. Plaintiff entered a songwriting competition and agreed to the terms of the contest rules including an arbitration provision. Plaintiff did not win the contest, but alleges that the song he submitted was used by defendant for a music video. The court held that defendant was not a party to the arbitration agreement and could not invoke its provisions.

(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.

(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) - Addressed whether a convicted criminal's period of supervised release is tolled -- in effect, paused -- during pretrial detention for a new criminal offense. Held that tolling occurs if certain conditions are met. Justice Thomas delivered the opinion of the 5-4 Court.

(United States Supreme Court) - Struck down a provision of the federal supervised-release statute, 18 U.S.C. section 3583(k). That section imposes mandatory minimum five-year sentences when a judge finds by a preponderance of the evidence that a defendant on supervised release committed one of several enumerated offenses, including possession of child pornography. Justice Gorsuch announced the judgment of the Court and delivered a plurality opinion on behalf of himself and three justices. Justice Breyer concurred in the judgment.

(United States Supreme Court) - Vacated and remanded. Plaintiffs as voters in North Carolina and Maryland filed suit challenging congressional districting maps as unconstitutional partisan gerrymanders. The district court ruled in favor of plaintiffs. The US Supreme Court held that partisan gerrymandering claims present political questions that are beyond the reach of the federal courts.

(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 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.

Men's & women's Mod clothing at Madcap England. Huge range of boating blazers, flares, racing jumpers, polos and dresses. Free UK delivery orders over £75.

RT @mrbromwich: I have been in and around DOJ since 1983. I have never seen a case dropped after someone has pled guilty and the underlying facts demonstrate beyond any shadow of a doubt he is guilty. This is simply a pardon by another name. A black day in DOJ history.

Google Lens now lets you copy/paste text from handwritten notes to your laptop!

I can’t stop laughing at this.

If the authorities can’t satisfy the public’s desire to know more, others will fill the void with misinformation. Carl Bergstrom, professor of biology at the UW, is mentioned.

(United States Federal Circuit) - Affirmed that tribal sovereign immunity could not be asserted in a patent proceeding. A pharmaceutical company involved in a dispute over an eye medication patent transferred the title of its patent to a Native American tribe, which then moved to terminate the patent proceeding on the basis of sovereign immunity. Concluding that tribal sovereign immunity cannot be asserted in inter partes review, the Federal Circuit affirmed the denial of the Tribe's motion to terminate the proceeding.

(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.

(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.

(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.

(United States Second Circuit) - Reversed. Finding the trial court’s exclusion of three defense witnesses violated defendant’s constitutional right to present a complete defense, the panel reverses and remands the judgement of the district court with direction to grant the writ.

(United States Seventh Circuit) - Affirmed. Defendant, a prior felon, was pulled over for a traffic stop. A drug-sniffing dog alerted on Defendants car. A search of the vehicle did not find drugs but did find a gun. Defendant was charged with felon-in-possession. Defendant was sentenced to 15 years. Defendant appealed on grounds that search was improper and error by trial court. Appellate court found no reversible error.

(California Court of Appeal) - Appeal dismissed. The trial court’s order was a preliminary eligibility determination and was not appealable under Penal Code section 1238.