(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).

(California Court of Appeal) - In a former on-air radio personality's action for disability discrimination, wrongful termination and related employment claims, the trial court's grant of summary judgment to employer-defendant is reversed where material issues of fact exist regarding each of plaintiff's claims.

(United States Ninth Circuit) - In a suit for trademark infringement and unfair competition brought under the Lanham Act by a producer of karaoke music tracks, alleging that the defendants performed karaoke shows using unauthorized 'media-shifted' files that had been copied onto computer hard drives from the compact discs released by the plaintiff, the district court's dismissal is affirmed where plaintiff did not state a claim under the Lanham Act because there was no likelihood of consumer confusion about the origin of a good properly cognizable in a claim of trademark infringement.

(California Court of Appeal) - Held that a fan of the singer Michael Jackson could not proceed with her proposed class action lawsuit against an entertainment company and others for releasing a posthumous album that allegedly contained three fake tracks not actually sung by the popular singer. The defendants, who filed an anti-SLAPP motion, contended that the claims against them must be stricken. Agreeing with them, the California Second Appellate District reversed the trial court's denial of the anti-SLAPP motion in relevant part.

(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.

(United States Ninth Circuit) - Held that an African American-owned operator of television networks sufficiently pleaded a claim that a cable television operator refused to enter into a carriage contract based on racial bias, in violation of 42 U.S.C. section 1981. Also, the section 1981 claim was not barred by the First Amendment. On interlocutory appeal, affirmed denial of a motion to dismiss.

(KS Supreme Court) - No. 114,937

(United States Ninth Circuit) - In a suit for trademark infringement and unfair competition brought under the Lanham Act by a producer of karaoke music tracks, alleging that the defendants performed karaoke shows using unauthorized 'media-shifted' files that had been copied onto computer hard drives from the compact discs released by the plaintiff, the district court's dismissal is affirmed where plaintiff did not state a claim under the Lanham Act because there was no likelihood of consumer confusion about the origin of a good properly cognizable in a claim of trademark infringement.

(United States Fourth Circuit) - In a trademark and unfair competition action brought by a haircare product manufacturer and holder of a registered trademark against a competitor haircare product manufacturer, the district court's grant of summary judgment in favor of defendant is affirmed where plaintiff failed to show the marks were likely to be confused.

(United States Third Circuit) - Affirming a summary judgment to the defendant Tyson Foods in a dispute involving their use of the word 'Parks' in reference to hotdogs where the plaintiff once held trademark on this word's use to sell hotdogs until it failed to renew the trademark in the early 2000's.

(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 Supreme Court) - Addressed a question concerning a method of serving civil process on a foreign state. The Republic of Sudan argued that a mailing must be sent directly to the foreign minister's office in the foreign state, not to the foreign state's U.S. embassy. The U.S. Supreme Court agreed with Sudan's argument in an 8-1 decision. Justice Alito delivered the Court's opinion, in this case arising out of the 2000 bombing of the Navy vessel USS Cole.

(United States Supreme Court) - On a question of civil procedure, held that a third-party counterclaim defendant -- that is, a party brought into a lawsuit through a counterclaim filed by the original defendant -- may not remove a class-action counterclaim from state court to federal court. Justice Thomas, joined by the four liberal justices, delivered the opinion of a 5-4 Court in this debt collection lawsuit.

(United States Supreme Court) - Vacated and remanded. Plaintiff is a Vietnam veteran who sought disability benefits from the Veterans Administration for post-traumatic stress. The VA eventually granted benefits but only from the motion to re-open his case and not from the date of the original application. Court of Appeals affirmed the ruling citing the deference doctrine. The US Supreme Court vacated the judgment and remanded to have the lower court determine if the deference doctrine applied in this case.

(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.

#architektura #architekt #dom #design

#architektura #architekt #dom #design

r/Coronavirus: In December 2019, a novel coronavirus strain (SARS-CoV-2) emerged in the city of Wuhan, China. This subreddit seeks to monitor the …

RT @IsaacScher__: NEW: Half of all Brooklynites are white, but 97.5% of the borough's social distancing arrests were of people of color.

I got to MIDDLE by myself, but now I'm fucking stuck and I have decided (because of Linear Algebra) that I fucking hate all math for all time and hate life and the universe because I hate math so much and I am angry that I suck so bad at math and that there is so much terminology and minutia, all of which leading to absolutely nothing. It infuriates me. Thus the Rubiks also infuriates me. I am going to quit computer programming because of this. I am too old for this shit. Maybe I should leave my wife too, and run away from home. This whole life is getting me really down right now.

(NY Court of Appeals) - No. 85

Joan Wong On March 27, as the U.S. topped 100,000 confirmed cases of COVID-19, Donald Trump stood at the lectern of the White House press-briefing room and was asked what he’d say about the pandemic to a child.

It's here! The source code for the COVID-19 BETA Apps. ✅Android: ✅iOS: ✅Documentation:

I can’t stop laughing at this.

Blimey. They didn’t hold back on this. —Read, if for no other reason than the incredibly detailed timeline of #coronavirus.

Democrat and former presidential candidate Mayor Bill de Blasio "said the police had used enforcement authority properly," @nytimes reports:

Who framed Roger Rabbit? Talking about Software Development in companies is about using frames. The prevalent frame is the that of the 'Backlog'. Thinking in this frame defines success as finishing the backlog. The pressure of throughput leads to engineering cutting corners and makes developers unhappy. Thinking in an 'Impact' frame leads to more successful company and happier developers. Stephan Schmidt

Important new CitizenLab report: "We Chat, They Watch: How International Users Unwittingly Build up WeChat’s Chinese Censorship Apparatus"

The 1977 Zork source code is on GitHub, courtesy the MIT Libraries Department of Distinctive Collections! It’s written in MDL for the PDP-10.

Sure, the Velociraptors Are Still On the Loose, But That’s No Reason Not to Reopen Jurassic Park

(United States Federal Circuit) - In a patent infringement action, arising after two manufacturers of ambient light sensors shared technical and financial information during negotiations for a possible merger, the appeals court affirmed in part, reversed in part, and vacated in part a jury verdict for plaintiff as follows: 1) defendant's liability for trade secret misappropriation regarding a photodiode array structure was affirmed; 2) several patent infringement claims were reversed and several were affirmed; and 3) monetary damage awards were vacated and remanded for further consideration.

(United States Federal Circuit) - Affirmed the bench trial finding that valid patents still existed in a longstanding pharmaceutical drug called Aveed after defendant Custopharm was sued for patent infringement by Endo Pharmaceuticals and Bayer after seeking FDA approval to produce a generic version of Aveed.

(United States Federal Circuit) - Held that a teacher working for the U.S. Department of Defense Domestic Dependent Elementary and Secondary Schools failed to file a timely petition for review of a decision removing her from the federal service. The teacher, who argued that her procedural due process rights were violated when she was fired from her job teaching on a military base, petitioned for review of an arbitrator's decision. However, the Federal Circuit concluded that her petition for review was not timely filed and thus dismissed it.

(United States Federal Circuit) - Affirmed the denial of an importer's challenge to an import duty levied by U.S. Customs and Border Protection. The company argued that the correct duty rate on its imported light-emitting diode (LED) candles was 2 percent rather than 3.9 percent. On appeal from the U.S. Court of International Trade, the Federal Circuit agreed with the government that the LED candles fell within a classification that was subject to a 3.9 percent import duty. The panel thus affirmed summary judgment for the government.

(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.

(United States Federal Circuit) - Affirmed an arbitrator’s decision sustaining plaintiff’s removal from employment as a corrections officer with the Bureau of Prisons. The Federal Circuit reasoned that there was no claim of prejudice for the delay between the notice of employment infractions and the date of termination and it found plaintiff’s other arguments unpersuasive.

(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.

(United States Federal Circuit) - Held that the federal government did not properly calculate the retirement annuity of a retired federal employee. The retiree, who had served in both the military and civilian sectors of the U.S. government, argued that he was entitled to civilian service credit for additional discrete time periods of his government service. On his petition for review of a Merit Systems Protection Board decision, the Federal Circuit affirmed in part and reversed in part.

(United States Seventh Circuit) - Affirmed. An unconstitutional conviction did not occur when an attorney confirmed he no longer disputed restitution while in chambers but repeated this withdrawal in open court.