us

Team USA labels report of Ryder Cup postponement 'inaccurate'




us

Euro Tour hopeful of late-May return as virus impacts 2 more events




us

The Open focused on proceeding as scheduled, exploring contingencies




us

Augusta National donates $2M for local COVID-19 relief




us

McLaren withdraws from Aussie GP as team member tests positive for coronavirus




us

Australian GP canceled over coronavirus fears




us

Red Bull boss wanted camp for team drivers to deliberately catch coronavirus




us

Canadian GP postponed due to coronavirus pandemic




us

With other sports paused, this budding NASCAR star is making the (virtual) leap




us

Martin v. US

(United States Federal Circuit) - Affirmed that a Fifth Amendment takings claim was not ripe in a case where the plaintiffs alleged that the U.S. government had caused a compensable taking by barring repairs to forest-fire-damaged roads which provided the only means to access their patented mining and homestead claims within the Santa Fe National Forest. In finding that their regulatory taking case was not yet ripe for review, the appeals court noted that plaintiffs had not yet applied for a permit to reconstruct the forest roads.




us

Endo Pharmaceuticals Solutions v. Custopharm Inc.

(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.




us

Lee v. US

(United States Federal Circuit) - Affirmed the dismissal of class action employment law claims brought by independent contractors working for the government-funded broadcast service Voice of America. The contractors alleged that they should have been appointed to positions in the civil service or retained through personal-services contracts instead of working under purchase order vendor contracts that provided less in the way of compensation and benefits. In affirming the dismissal, the Federal Circuit agreed with the trial court's finding that plaintiffs had set forth no viable theory of recovery.




us

Shell Oil Co. v. US

(United States Federal Circuit) - Affirmed that the U.S. government had breached certain World War II-era contracts with several oil companies. In this long-running litigation, the oil companies claimed that the federal government, which had sued them for hazardous waste cleanup, was partly liable for the cleanup costs due to language in their 1940s government contracts to produce aviation fuel for the war effort. The Court of Federal Claims agreed with the oil companies and awarded them nearly $100 million in contract damages, collectively. The federal government appealed, but the Federal Circuit affirmed.




us

Horvath v. US

(United States Federal Circuit) - Reversed the dismissal of overtime compensation claims brought by a special agent of the U.S. Secret Service. In a class action complaint, the plaintiff special agent argued that Office of Personnel Management regulations improperly required that certain overtime hours be worked consecutively in order to trigger compensation. Agreeing with his position, the Federal Circuit held that the challenged OPM regulations were contrary to the unambiguous meaning of the relevant statute. The panel thus reversed in relevant part and remanded.




us

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.




us

Alta Wind v. US

(United States Federal Circuit) - Vacated and remanded the trial court's ruling for plaintiff which had sued the US for additional grant money for alternative energy projects under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. The US appealed arguing that it had overpaid plaintiff. In vacating, the appellate court found that the trial court erred in finding for the plaintiff and it remanded to re-examine the government’s calculation method.




us

Gerson Co. v. US

(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.




us

Sigvaris, Inc. v. US

(United States Federal Circuit) - Affirmed a judgment of the US Court of International Trade (ITC) which had found that the certain merchandise involving compression hosiery was not duty free. On appeal, the Federal Circuit held that the analysis of the ITC was incorrect, but the correct result was ultimately reached.




us

Labatte v. US

(United States Federal Circuit) - Reversed and remanded where the plaintiff appealed from a judgment of the Court of Federal Claims which had dismissed his complaint for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. In reversing and remanding, the Federal Circuit held that the court erred in concluding that it lacked jurisdiction.




us

Crow Creek Sioux Tribe v. US

(United States Federal Circuit) - Affirmed the dismissal of a federally recognized Indian tribe's lawsuit seeking damages and injunctive relief for the alleged taking and mismanagement of its water rights. The Crow Creek Sioux Tribe filed suit against the federal government seeking to enforce its water rights on its reservation located along the Missouri River in South Dakota. Agreeing with the U.S. Court of Federal Claims, the Federal Circuit held that the tribe failed to allege an injury in fact, because there was no allegation that the tribe lacked sufficient water to fulfill the purposes of the reservation.




us

Shaw v. US

(United States Federal Circuit) - Held that the U.S. government did not breach its obligations under a settlement arising out of injuries to a child born at a military hospital. The parents brought this suit alleging that the government was contractually liable because the settlement provided for the purchase of several annuities that would make periodic damages payments, but in 2012 the issuer of the annuities was liquidated and the payments were substantially reduced. Affirming summary judgment for the government, the Federal Circuit held that the settlement agreement did not obligate the government to act as a guarantor of the future periodic annuity payments.




us

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.




us

Gordon v. US

(United States Federal Circuit) - Held that two female physicians working at Veterans Administration healthcare facilities failed to establish a prima facie case of an Equal Pay Act violation. The government argued that the physicians failed to raise a fact issue that the difference in pay was presently or historically based on sex. On appeal, the Federal Circuit affirmed summary judgment in favor of the government.




us

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.




us

US v. Clark

(United States Seventh Circuit) - Vacated conviction, otherwise affirmed. A hearing should have been held on the issue of a search warrant where the criminal informant was potentially not credible.




us

US v. Glenn

(United States Fifth Circuit) - Affirmed. There was no error in proceedings leading to the conviction of a man for transporting, shipping, and accessing child pornography.



  • Criminal Law & Procedure

us

US v. Giles

(United States Seventh Circuit) - Affirmed. A confession taken after prolonged solitary confinement did not violate Fifth Amendment rights.




us

US v. Cano

(United States Ninth Circuit) - Reversed. Because forensic cell phone searches require reasonable suspicion, the district court erred in denying the defendant’s motion to suppress evidence obtained from warrantless searches of his cell phone.



  • Criminal Law & Procedure

us

US v. Shayota

(United States Ninth Circuit) - Affirmed. Concluding a witness was unavailable due to invocation of his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination, the district court admitted prior civil deposition testimony. The panel affirms, finding any error was harmless because excluding the depositions would not have changed the outcome of the trial.



  • Criminal Law & Procedure

us

US v. Begay

(United States Ninth Circuit) - Affirmed in part, reversed in part. Defendant’s conviction for second-degree murder affirmed. However, because second-degree murder can be committed recklessly, it does not categorically constitute a “crime of violence.” Therefore, the conviction of discharging a firearm during a crime of violence is reversed.



  • Criminal Law & Procedure

us

US v. Adams

(United States Seventh Circuit) - Affirmed. Probable cause supported the search of a man's home and even if it hadn't the officers could rely on the warrant in good faith. Sentencing was properly calculated.




us

US v. Hopper

(United States Seventh Circuit) - Partially affirmed, partially vacated. A man was properly convicted on drug charges and was subject to a sentence enhancement for maintaining drug premises, but the court plainly erred in calculating his relevant conduct and the case was remanded for resentencing.




us

US v. Johnson

(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.




us

US v. Burden

(United States DC Circuit) - Vacated and remanded. The district court erred in admitting deposition testimony by a witness who was deported before trial because they failed to make reasonable efforts to procure his presence.




us

US v. Lee

(United States Seventh Circuit) - Affirmed. Defendant was charged with executing a scheme to defraud local governments by falsely representing that his industrial fans were assembled in the United States. Appeals court found no error in the judgment or the sentence.




us

USA v. Simon

(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.




us

US v. Green

(United States Ninth Circuit) - Vacated and remanded. The panel held that the district court erred by concluding it could not listen to the defendant’s allocution before determining whether a reduction of acceptance of responsibility was warranted under the Sentencing Guidelines, affecting the defendant’s substantial rights and fairness of the proceedings.



  • Criminal Law & Procedure

us

US v. Kelerchian

(United States Seventh Circuit) - Affirmed. The conviction of a man involved in defrauding arms manufacturers into selling machinegun and laser sights restricted by law for law enforcement and military use was affirmed.



  • Criminal Law & Procedure

us

Janusiak v. Cooper

(United States Seventh Circuit) - Affirmed. The state court determination that the long questioning and reference to access to her children were not coercion was affirmed, where a woman convicted of first degree homicide of an infant argued that statements made during an interrogation were involuntary and should have been suppressed.




us

US v. Fitzgerald

(United States Ninth Circuit) - Vacated and remanded. The defendant’s prior Nevada conviction for attempted battery with substantial bodily harm in violation of Nev. Rev. Stat. Section 200.481(2)(b) and 193.330 qualifies as a felony conviction for a crime of violence under U.S.S.G. Section 2K2.1.



  • Criminal Law & Procedure

us

US v. Fuentes-Rodriguez

(United States Fifth Circuit) - Affirmed. A sentence following a guilty plea for illegal reentry was proper because assault-family violence qualifies as a crime of violence and is therefore an aggravated felony.




us

US v. Barber

(United States Seventh Circuit) - Affirmed. Facebook evidence and cellphone data were properly admitted in the conviction of a man for stealing firearms from a federally licensed firearms dealer.




us

US v. Aguilar-Alonzo

(United States Fifth Circuit) - Vacated and remanded. A two-level enhancement of the sentence in the case of a man convicted on marijuana charges was not supported by the evidence.




us

US v. Lillard

(United States Ninth Circuit) - Reversed. The panel held that, in the context of the restitution statute, “period of incarceration” does not include pretrial detention. The district court’s order to seize funds in the defendant’s inmate trust account is reversed.



  • Criminal Law & Procedure

us

US v. London, Jr.

(United States First Circuit) - Affirmed. A motion to correct a 1996 sentence as a career offender was not timely because the motion asserts a right not recognized in caselaw.




us

US v. Haynes

(United States Seventh Circuit) - Affirmed. Different charges involved in a nested set of charges were divisible and a jury could find the accused guilty of the underlying Hobbs Act robberies.




us

US v. Pugh

(United States Second Circuit) - Affirmed, remanded for resentencing. Because defendant’s letter describing his allegiance to the Islamic State was never translated or otherwise communicated to his wife, the marital communication privilege does not apply.



  • Criminal Law & Procedure

us

US v. Heon-Ceol Chi

(United States Ninth Circuit) - Finding the crime described in Article 129 of South Korea’s Criminal Code fits squarely within the definition of “bribing a public official” from 18 U.S.C. Section 1956, the indictment was sufficient and there was no instructional error.



  • Criminal Law & Procedure

us

US v. Kalu

(United States Fifth Circuit) - Affirmed. The application of two sentencing enhancements in the case of a person who pleaded guilty to a conspiracy to commit healthcare fraud was not a procedural error.




us

US v. Pervis

(United States Fifth Circuit) - Affirmed. A Texas bank robbery was properly considered a crime of violence and it was a second or subsequent offense in relation to an attempt made two days earlier.