OPINION/ORDER
With him on the briefs were Martin R. Feore Jr. and Scott Dailard were on the brief for amicus curiae Paxson Communications Corporation. With him on the brief were Jane E. Andrew Jay Schwartzman and Harold Feld were on the brief for interve nors. The local television ownership rule now on review allows common ownership of two television stations in the same local market if one of the stations is not among the four highest ranked stations in the market and eight independent ly owned. Inc. (
OPINION/ORDER
Sennet were on the briefs. General Counsel at the time the brief was filed. Were on the brief. Goodman were on the brief for amici curiae Association of Local Television Stations. WDZL and the Sun Sentinel were in the same primary market. The Commission nevertheless granted Trib 1 The other stations are: KTXL(TV). TX. 2 Grade A contour is a measure of signal field strength. The Commission has said that the boundary of the Grade A contour is set where a good picture may be expected to be available for at least 90% of the time at the best 70% of receiver locations. Which allowed Tribune to take possession of the WDZL station license (the merger was consummated on March 25. Operates or controls a daily newspaper and the grant of such license will result in [t]he Grade A contour of a TV station ... encompassing the entire community in which such newspaper is published.
OPINION/ORDER
With him on the briefs was Joel Kurtzberg. Reid Alan Cox was on the brief for amicus curiae Center for Individual Freedom in support of appellants. Jr. were on the brief for amici curiae Magazine Publishers of America. Is protected by a reporter's privilege arising from the First Amendment. We agree with the District Court that there is no First Amendment privilege protecting the evidence sought. It is not absolute. We further conclude that other assignments of error raised by appellants are without merit. In which he claimed to have been sent to Niger in 2002 by the Central Intelligence Agency (
OPINION/ORDER
The officers were never charged. The city police department announced publicly that it had concluded the officers were not involved in the alleged sexual assault. While we are sympathetic to the difficult and potentially dangerous situation undercover officers face after having their identities revealed to the public. It is unnecessary for us to reach the issue of whether KOB TV's First Amendment defense merited dismissal of the claims. I. BACKGROUND Vicente Alvarado and Steve Flores were undercover police officers for the City of Albuquerque in early 2004. The friend suggested that Alvarado and Flores were the two officers involved in the sexual assault. They were not told the nature of those allegations. The court order sealing the warrants was not addressed to KOB TV. KOB TV ran newscasts at 6 p.m. and 10 p.m. about the investigation in which Alvarado and Flores were named as being accused of the sexual assault. Someone informed KOB TV that Alvarado and Flores were undercover narcotics officers. KOB TV announced that the news station had learned they were undercover detectives and therefore blurred their faces.
OPINION/ORDER
Line 29 the cross reference is corrected to read
OPINION/ORDER
Enough is Enough. At issue is COPA's constitutionality. A statute designed to protect minors from
OPINION/ORDER
With him on the briefs were Richard R. With him on the brief were Daniel M. Mikula were on the brief for intervenors Minority Media and Telecommunications Council. Campbell was on the brief for intervenor Nation al Organization for Women. Hunnicutt were on the brief for amici curiae Radio One. Whitehouse were on the brief for amici curiae The Leadership Conference on Civil Rights and National Council of the Churches of Christ. Curran and Eduardo Pena were on the brief for amicus curiae Congressional Black Caucus. We hold first that the Broadcasters fail to substantiate their claim that the rule is arbitrary and capricious. Thus creating a race based classification that is not narrowly tailored to sup port a compelling governmental interest and is therefore unconstitutional. Because we find that the unconstitutional portion of the rule is not severable. Necessity will be served by the granting of such application.
With him on the brief were Daniel M. Mikula were on the brief for intervenors
Minority Media and Telecommunications Council. Campbell was on the brief for intervenor Nation
al Organization for Women. Hunnicutt were on the
brief for amici curiae Radio One. Whitehouse were on the
brief for amici curiae The Leadership Conference on Civil
Rights and National Council of the Churches of Christ.
Andrew J. Curran and Eduardo Pena were on the
brief for amicus curiae Congressional Black Caucus.
.
We hold first that the Broadcasters fail to substantiate
their claim that the rule is arbitrary and capricious. Thus creating a
race based classification that is not narrowly tailored to sup
port a compelling governmental interest and is therefore
unconstitutional. Because we find that the unconstitutional
portion of the rule is not severable.
OPINION/ORDER
We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1292(a)(1).1 Google argues that we lack jurisdiction over the preliminary injunction to the extent it enforces unregistered copyrights. Registration is generally a jurisdictional prerequisite to a suit for copyright infringement. As we will further explain below. Are connected to networks known collectively as the
OPINION/ORDER
The district court found that there was no evidence of a conspiracy between the Appellees and the other defendants to publish the complaint. That the Appellees' actions were protected by Michigan's
OPINION/ORDER
At issue is whether the First Amendment precludes imposition of civil damages for the disclosure of portions of a tape recording of an intercepted telephone conversation containing information of public significance when the defendants. Wyoming Valley West School District was in contract negotiations with the Wyoming Valley West School District Teachers' Union (the
OPINION/ORDER
The Wilsons allege that their Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment rights were violated when officers entered their home and sought to execute an arrest warrant for their son. The Wilson's grandchild who was present during a portion of the actions that form the basis of this lawsuit. The material facts are not disputed. Federal and state law enforcement agents were engaged in a joint effort to apprehend fugitives with a history of armed. Maryland Sheriff's Department was formed to execute an outstanding arrest warrant. GREETINGS: YOU ARE HEREBY COMMANDED TO TAKE DOMINIC JEROME WILSON IF HE/SHE BE FOUND IN YOUR BAILIWICK .... Were to accompany the officers to observe and chronicle the execution of the warrant.3 The reporters' participation was part of a two week. The officers encountered a man dressed only in undergarments who was very 2 A panel of this court earlier issued a decision reversing the district court. These two individuals were later identified as the Wilsons. Was not present. The Wilsons asserted that their constitutional rights under the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments were violated by the officers' actions in three ways: (1) the officers used excessive force in attempting to execute the arrest warrant.
on the brief were Christopher Landau and Daryl Joseffer.
Theodore J. With him on
the brief were Seth M.M. If the person knew it
was illegally intercepted. Is it part of
OPINION/ORDER
With him on the briefs was R. With him on the briefs were Frank W. Assistant Attorney Gener al at the time the briefs were filed. With him on the brief were Christopher Landau and Daryl Joseffer. With him on the brief were Seth M.M. If the person knew it was illegally intercepted. Is it part of
OPINION/ORDER
Tribune is in violation of the FCC's newspaper/broadcast cross ownership rule. After the last temporary waiver had expired and while Tribune's application for the permanent waiver was pending. Although we are sympathetic to Ellis's frustration in the face of agency inaction. That the same entity may own or control two television stations in the same market so long as: (i) at the time the application is filed. At least one of the stations is not ranked among the top four stations in audience rankings in the DMA. (Transferor) & Tribune Television Co. 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 November 16 application sought a waiver of the television duopoly rule.2 While Tribune's application was pending. Although WTXX is not ranked among the top four stations in the Hartford New Haven DMA. Eight independently owned and operated television stations would not have remained in this DMA after Tribune's proposed acquisition. Operates or controls a daily newspaper and the grant of such license will result in: . . . (3) The Grade A contour of a TV station.
OPINION/ORDER
The five defendants were arrested. Were The defendants raised the following additional issues on appeal: prosecutorial misconduct regarding the testimony of a government witness and during closing argument. Guerrero were also charged with conspiring to deliver to Cuba
OPINION/ORDER
The district court found that the Copyright Office's rulemaking 4 with respect to the Internet
OPINION/ORDER
Were dismissed as parties to the petition for writ of mandamus pursuant to the Court's Order dated July 11. At issue in this case is the disposition of more than 14. Petitioners are 450 plaintiffs who originally filed their suits in Texas state courts. Removal was proper because the additional defendants were named solely as a means to defeat federal jurisdiction. After the actions were transferred to the docket of MDL 1203. The District Court held that the non diverse defendants were
OPINION/ORDER
With him on the briefs were Cynthia L. With him on the brief were R. Stetson were on the brief for intervenor Motion Picture Association of America. Circuit Judge: It is axiomatic that administrative agencies may issue regulations only pursuant to authority delegated to them by Congress. The principal question presented by this case is whether Congress delegated authority to the Federal Communications Commission (
OPINION/ORDER
FACE gives aggrieved persons a right of action against whoever by
OPINION/ORDER
Or reputation or expose the natural defects of one who is alive. (3) the damages claim against the assistant district attorney arising from the search was barred by absolute prosecutorial immunity. We affirm both the dismissal of Mink's facial challenge to the Colorado criminal libel statute because he lacks standing and his claim is moot. We reverse the district court's dismissal of the damages claim arising from the search because we conclude it is not barred by absolute immunity. Which was created. Was to
OPINION/ORDER
The court determined that Nissan Motor's dilution suit was not barred by laches. That Nissan Computer's first commercial use of
Plaintiff has also appealed the district court's denial of Plaintiff's motion for a new trial and requested certification of two questions to the Oklahoma Supreme Court. These subsidiary matters are addressed in connection with the primary legal issues to which they pertain.
BACKGROUND
Plaintiff was the victim of a malicious hoax. The posting was made by someone using the screen name
Patrick Fisher. Each matter is considered in turn.
Plaintiff has also appealed the district court's denial of Plaintiff's motion for a new trial and requested certification of two questions to the Oklahoma Supreme Court. These subsidiary matters are addressed in connection with the primary legal issues to which they pertain.
BACKGROUND
Plaintiff was the victim of a malicious hoax. The posting was made by someone using the screen name
OPINION/ORDER
At least fourteen separate allegedly defamatory statements were identified. APC was the only provider of such services in the area. The series was also extensively promoted by the station by use of clips of portions of the report calculated to pique the interest of the viewing public.
OPINION/ORDER
The dispute is an outgrowth of aggressive and expansionist banking f l o wi n g f rom the C ongressional liberalization in recent years of national banking laws. Citizens National Bank of Evans City (CNBEC) is a community bank founded in 1878 in Evans City. (CFG) is a subsidiary holding company of the Royal Bank of Scotland. CNBEC claimed that nine of these former Mellon Bank branches were located near CNBEC branches. In addition some of the branches in Butler County were located on the same streets.
OPINION/ORDER
The dispute is an outgrowth of aggressive and expansionist banking f l o wi n g f rom the C ongressional liberalization in recent years of national banking laws. Citizens National Bank of Evans City (CNBEC) is a community bank founded in 1878 in Evans City. (CFG) is a subsidiary holding company of the Royal Bank of Scotland. CNBEC claimed that nine of these former Mellon Bank branches were located near CNBEC branches. In addition some of the branches in Butler County were located on the same streets.
OPINION/ORDER
1 an association of law Joining FAIR in its preliminary injunction motion and in this appeal are: the Society for Law Teachers. We hold that FAIR has demonstrated a likelihood of success on the merits of its First Amendment claims and that it is entitled to preliminary injunctive relief. Background Facts 2 and Procedural Posture Law Schools' Nondiscrimination Policies Law schools have long maintained formal policies of nondiscrimination that withhold career placement services from employers who exclude employees and applicants based on such factors as race. The facts on appeal are not in dispute. Supp. 2d at 277. 7 2 virtually every law school now has a comprehensive policy like the following: [The] School of Law is committed to a policy of equal opportunity for all students and graduates. A servicemember is separated from the military if it is found that he or she
OPINION/ORDER
Who was a secretary at the Democratic National Committee (DNC) for a short time in 1972. During several public appearances and on a world wide web site Liddy stated that the burglars' objective during the Watergate break in was to determine whether the Democrats possessed information embarrassing to John Dean.1 More specifically. Liddy asserted that the burglars were seeking a compromising photograph of Dean's fiance that was located in Wells's desk among several photographs that were used to offer prostitution services to outof town guests. The district court determined that Wells was an involuntary public figure who could not prove actual malice by clear and convincing evidence. Because we determine that Wells is not a public figure for purposes of the ongoing public debate regarding Watergate and we also conclude that Louisiana law does not apply to two of Wells's defamation counts. We reverse the district court's grant of summary judgment and remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. 1 John Dean was legal counsel to President Richard M.
OPINION/ORDER
Circuit Judge: In the Spring of 2003 Mike Price was head coach of the University of Alabama's Crimson Tide football team. The head coach at a major university is a powerful figure. Who are in highest places. Have the most power . . . have the least liberty. Because they are most observed.
OPINION/ORDER
Circuit Judge: Negative political advertising is nothing new. Where's my pa?
OPINION/ORDER
She contends the district court erred in concluding that the media defendants were not state actors. I. Anderson alleges that she was raped by her estranged husband while she was unconscious. So long as the broadcast was limited to a view of the perpetrator's face and was
OPINION/ORDER
Were convicted and sentenced for The Honorable James L. Hernandez was also convicted of conspiracy to commit murder by supporting and implementing a plan to shoot down United States civilian aircraft outside of Cuban and United States airspace. That the pervasive community prejudice against Fidel Castro and the Cuban government and its agents and the publicity surrounding the trial and other community events combined to create a situation where they were unable to obtain a fair and impartial trial.1 We agree. Medina contend that the evidence was insufficient on the counts relating to violations of the Foreign Services Registration Act. Our review of the evidence at trial is more extensive than is typical for consideration of an appeal involving the denial of a motion for change of venue. This is so because the trial evidence itself created safety concerns for the jury which implicate venue considerations. Medina were arrested on a criminal complaint on 12 September 1998. Were subsequently indicted with nine codefendants for conspiring to act as agents of the Republic of Cuba without registering with the Attorney General of the United States and to defraud the United States.
OPINION/ORDER
With him on the brief were Robert S. Asserting that they are overin clusive or. The Commission is to grant a broadcast license only if the
Argued the cause for respondents.With him on the brief were Robert S. Asserting that they are overin clusive or. The Federal Radio Commission).See 47 U.S.C. s 301.The Commission is to grant a broadcast license only if the ". It was clear to the Commission that action needed to be taken to stop unlicensed broadcast ing. In 1999 the Commission proposed to modify its low power radio rules and sought public comment upon whether it should ". 1999) set out in the Low Power Proposal.Id. at p p 53 54.This licensing condition for broadcast pirates was applicable both to individuals and to corporate applicants. Including the applicant's officers and directors.Id. at p 54. The Commission's proposal conditionally to license former pirates was received with dismay in the Congress.Senator Gregg.
OPINION/ORDER
Lundell argues that the district court erred in setting aside the jury verdict because there was substantial evidence that the
OPINION/ORDER
AKRTL was informed by the Alaska Public Offices Commission that if it wished to engage in
OPINION/ORDER
Insisting that a biased jury that was convened for a trial in an improper venue convicted him after considering impermissible hearsay evidence. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1291. MOORE 14433 I We set forth first John Casey's testimony about how his wife was shot and died. Rosemary Casey was shot by a bullet fired from John Casey's semiautomatic .30 06 caliber hunting rifle. John Casey decided to oil his rifle by spraying Break Free oil down the barrel because the barrel was rusty. After placing a piece of cardboard and some rags over a garbage can which served as a makeshift workspace he planned to use to clean the gun John Casey moved the slide on the rifle back and no shell ejected or was visible. John Casey told the jury that while he held a rag over the rifle's action (to catch the cleaning solvent as it was forced through the barrel). His key defensive testimony was that he then unintentionally touched the trigger. She was later flown to Seattle for treatment but. Made it impossible for him to have a fair trial there.
OPINION/ORDER
Circuit Judge: Defendant/appellant Geraldo Rivera appeals the district court's determination that a statement Rivera made to plaintiff/appellee Neal Horsley during the course of a television program hosted by Rivera is not protected as a matter of law by the First Amendment of the United States Constitution nor by applicable state law. Rivera asserted that Horsley was an
OPINION/ORDER
District Judge: This matter is before the Court on the Defendants' appeal of the Western District of Virginia's grant of Summary Judgment in favor of the Plaintiffs. At issue is the constitutionality of Va. The District Court's ruling granting summary judgment and striking down the statute is AFFIRMED. Plaintiffs' speech is accessible both within and outWe do not recite here the specifics of how the Internet functions. We note that the general contours of the Internet have been described in various other judicial opinions. Plaintiffs facially challenged the constitutionality of section 18.2 391 and were granted a permanent injunction by the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia enjoining the enforcement of the statute. Of commercial materials that are harmful to juveniles. Several plaintiffs brought suit challenging the 1985 amendment as facially unconstitutional on the grounds that it was impermissibly vague and violated the First Amendment. The statute was eventually upheld by the Fourth Circuit in light of a narrowing construction accorded to the statute by the Supreme Court of Virginia.
OPINION/ORDER
Is withdrawn. Appellee's petition for rehearing and the petition for rehearing en banc are DENIED as moot. Is a professional photographer who has copyrighted many of his images of the American West. Some of these images are located on Kelly's web site or other web sites with which Kelly has a license agreement. When Kelly discovered that his photographs were part of Arriba's search engine database. The creation and use of the thumbnails in the search engine is a fair use. It is now known as
OPINION/ORDER
Perfect 10 alleges that numerous websites based in several countries have stolen its proprietary images. The Visa and MasterCard entities are associations of member banks that issue credit cards to consumers. FDC's stated reason for the termination is that the percentage of Perfect 10's customers who later disputed the charges attributed to them (the chargeback rate) exceeded contractual limits. Perfect 10 claims these chargeback rates were temporarily and substantially inflated because Perfect 10 was the
OPINION/ORDER
With him on the briefs was Frank Cicero Jr. Dupree Jr. were on the brief for amici curiae Dow Jones & Company. With him on the briefs was Louis K. Circuit Judge: Both parties to this case are members of the United States House of Representatives. We held that Representative McDermott did not have a First Amendment right to disclose the tape. At the time of the conversation Gingrich was the subject of an investigation by the House Committee on Standards of Official Conduct. Representative Boehner was chairman of the House Republican Conference. Representative Boehner was in Florida when he joined the conference call. Representative McDermott was the ranking Democrat on the Ethics Committee. The letter read: Enclosed in the envelope you will find a tape of a conversation heard December 21. The call was a conference call heard over a scanner. We felt the information included were [sic] of importance to the committee. We were advised by her to turn the tape directly over to you. We also understand that we will be granted immunity.
OPINION/ORDER
Circuit Judge: Famed motorcycle stuntman Evel Knievel and his wife Krystal were photographed when they attended ESPN's Action Sports and Music Awards in 2001. Who was wearing a motorcycle jacket and rosetinted sunglasses. Contending that the photograph and caption were defamatory because they accused Evel of soliciting prostitution and KNIEVEL v. ESPN 31 implied that Krystal was a prostitute. The court granted ESPN's motion on the ground that the photograph and its caption were not defamatory as a matter of law. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. At least seven books and four motion pictures have been dedicated to his life. Well known musicians Ben Harper and James Hatfield were there. As were popular rappers Busta Rhymes and LL Cool J. Who is commonly thought of as the
OPINION/ORDER
Circuit Judge: At issue in this appeal is a Kentucky statute imposing reporting requirements upon broadcast media that sell advertising time to Kentucky gubernatorial candidates. We are presented with the question of whether the Kentucky reporting requirements may be applied to the West Virginia Broadcasters within the constraints of the Due Process Clause of the Four2 teenth Amendment and the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment. Kentucky will match two dollars for every one dollar in private donations raised by a qualifying slate of candidates. Are required to report all expenditures and contributions to the Kentucky Registry of Election Finance (the
OPINION/ORDER
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. The motion is granted. The motion is denied in all other respects. This court denies Appellants' request for costs related to the preparation of its Motion to Strike and its Motion to Have Joint Appendix Corrected. 1 BERLYN INC. v. THE GAZETTE NEWSPAPERS 3 II A The plaintiffs are Berlyn. Berlyn is owned by Lynn and Bernie Kapiloff. Rossingol is a self described
OPINION/ORDER
Enough is Enough. In which the Court held that our decision affirming the District Court's grant of a preliminary injunction against the enforcement of the Child Online Protection Act (
OPINION/ORDER
Is amended as follows: Footnote 21 on page 48. The Secretary's supporting arguments are enlightening: . . .
OPINION/ORDER
With them on the joint briefs were Bruce D. With him on the brief were Jane E. With him on the brief was Jack N. Leanza were on the brief for intervenors/amici curiae Con sumer Federation of America and United Church of Christ. Is the Rule irrational? 16 2. Chief Judge: Before the court are five consoli dated petitions to review the Federal Communications Com mission's 1998 decision not to repeal or to modify the national television station ownership rule. (UCC) have intervened and filed briefs in support of the Commission's decision to retain the national television station ownership rule. We conclude that the Commission's decision to retain the rules was arbitrary and capricious and contrary to law. We vacate the cable/broadcast cross ownership rule because we think it un likely the Commission will be able on remand to justify retaining it. To review each of the Commission's ownership rules every two years: The Commission shall review its rules adopted pursuant to this section and all of its ownership rules biennially as part of its regulatory reform review under section 11 of the Communications Act of 1934 and shall determine whether any of such rules are necessary in the public interest as the result of competition.
OPINION/ORDER
With them on the joint briefs were Bruce D. With him on the brief were Jane E. With him on the brief was Jack N. Leanza were on the brief for intervenors/amici curiae Con sumer Federation of America and United Church of Christ. Is the Rule irrational? 16 2. Chief Judge: Before the court are five consoli dated petitions to review and one appeal from the Federal Communications Com mission's 1998 decision not to repeal or to modify the national television station ownership rule. (UCC) have intervened and filed briefs in support of the Commission's decision to retain the national television station ownership rule. We conclude that the Commission's decision to retain the rules was arbitrary and capricious and contrary to law. We vacate the cable/broadcast cross ownership rule because we think it un likely the Commission will be able on remand to justify retaining it. To review each of the Commission's ownership rules every two years: The Commission shall review its rules adopted pursuant to this section and all of its ownership rules biennially as part of its regulatory reform review under section 11 of the Communications Act of 1934 and shall determine whether any of such rules are necessary in the public interest as the result of competition.
OPINION/ORDER
The private interests that will be affected by the state's notification in Tier 2 and Tier 3 cases if the outcome of the hearing is in the state's favor are very substantial. This jeopardy will not only extend to virtually every aspect of the registrant's everyday life. It will also last at least 15 years. Has a compelling interest in protecting its citizens by giving prompt notification to potential victims and relevant caregivers with respect to registrants who are accurately determined to be Tier 2 or Tier 3 risks. The state also has an interest in ensuring that its classification and notification system is both fair and accurate. The state has no substantial interest in notifying persons who will not come into contact with the registrant. Nor has it any interest in notifying those who will come into contact with a registrant who has erroneously been identified as a moderate or high risk. Compared to proceedings in which that burden is on the registrant. The 60 risk of error will be materially reduced without materially impairing the state's ability to secure a prompt determination and without imposing substantial new administrative burdens on the state.
OPINION/ORDER
Facts Morris is a media company that publishes print and electronic newspapers. PGA is the sponsor of a series of professional golf tournaments throughout North America known as the PGA Tour. RTSS is an elaborate electronic relay scoring system that relies on state of the art computer technology and equipment as well as dozens of trained workers and volunteers. 2 RTSS works as follows. The scores are then collected by other volunteers. The scores of all participating golfers are then processed at the remote production truck and transmitted to PGA's website. Which are scores that are transmitted electronically nearly contemporaneously to their actual occurrence on the golf course. The compiled scores are also transmitted to an on site media center where members of the media are able to access the scores. The same information is also transmitted to various electronic leaderboards located throughout the golf course. The 3 only source of compiled golf scores for all tournament players is RTSS. The only physical location at which to obtain compiled golf scores is the media center.
OPINION/ORDER
Circuit Judge: We are confronted in this case with a tension between two issues of critical constitutional concern: the need to protect the confidentiality of jurors' deliberations while. Guaranteeing the right of the press and the public to have access to court proceedings. We will. We will reverse in part and affirm in part the restrictions imposed by the district court on the conduct of juror interviews. We find that the sealing of the transcript was accomplished prematurely. It was done without adequate notice. We further find that the restrictions imposed on the use of juror information at the time of the unsealing were not supported by an actual or potential threat either of juror harassment or of invasion of the deliberative process as it was taking place. Nor do we intend to suggest that the restrictions which we find to have been improperly imposed here may not be permissible in some future case. There are. Is directly controlling. That the presumptive right of access applied to the voir dire proceedings as they were recorded in the trial transcript.[fn1] Applying the requirement that detailed findings of the need for restrictions be made before any restriction is imposed.
OPINION/ORDER
M. Patricia Zimmerman were not entitled to the defense of judicial immunity in connection with the issuance of Vermont Notices Against Trespass broadly limiting the plaintiff's access to Vermont court property. Is a long time critic of the Vermont justice system who has sought to disseminate his message using a wide variety of means and media. Huminski complains that the restrictions are unconstitutional. One is abridgement of the rights that the First Amendment. The other is impairment of the ability of courts 1 Branzburg v. We conclude that Huminski had an individual First Amendment right of access to court proceedings even though he was not a party to and had no other official connection with them. The right created a presumption that he was entitled to access. Or proceedings and if the restrictions on his access were reasonably tailored to meet the legitimate goals of the exclusion. That this individual right was not wellsettled at the time of the events at issue here and that the defendants are therefore entitled to qualified immunity with respect thereto.
OPINION/ORDER
M. Patricia Zimmerman were not entitled to the defense of judicial immunity in connection with the issuance of Vermont Notices Against Trespass broadly limiting the plaintiff's access to Vermont court property. Is a long time critic of the Vermont justice system who has sought to disseminate his message using a wide variety of means and media. Huminski complains that the restrictions are unconstitutional. One is abridgement of the rights that the First Amendment. The other is impairment of the ability of courts 1 Branzburg v. We conclude that Huminski had an individual First Amendment right of access to court proceedings even though he was not a party to and had no other official connection with them. The right created a presumption that he was entitled to access. Or proceedings and if the restrictions on his access were reasonably tailored to meet the legitimate goals of the exclusion. That this individual right was not wellsettled at the time of the events at issue here and that the defendants are therefore entitled to qualified immunity with respect thereto.
OPINION/ORDER
M. Patricia Zimmerman were not entitled to the defense of judicial immunity in connection with the issuance of Vermont Notices Against Trespass broadly limiting the plaintiff's access to Vermont court property. Is a long time critic of the Vermont justice system who has sought to disseminate his message using a wide variety of means and media. Vermont officials therefore broadly prohibited Huminski's Huminski complains presence in and around certain state courthouses. that the restrictions are unconstitutional. One is abridgement of the rights that the First Amendment. Confers on members of the public and press to attend and report on judicial proceedings and to speak out on public issues. other is impairment of the ability of courts effectively and efficiently to protect their personnel. We conclude that Huminski had an individual First Amendment right of access to court proceedings even though he was not a party to and had no other official connection with them. The right created a We The presumption that he was entitled to access.
OPINION/ORDER
With him on the briefs was Henk Brands. With him on the brief were David W. Albert were on the brief for amici curiae Center for Media Education. At issue is the facial constitutional ity of two provisions of the Cable Television Consumer Pro tection and Competition Act of 1992. Time Warner argues that both provisions facially that is. We conclude that both provisions are facially constitutional. The district court held that the subscrib er limits provision is unconstitutional. The channel occupancy provision is constitutional. The Standard of Review Time Warner argues that the subscriber limits provision is a content based restriction of its ability to communicate with its audience. As such is subject to strict scrutiny. See * The district court at least appears to have found the channel occupancy provision constitutional on its face. Whether or not the regulations ultimately promulgated by the Commission will pass constitutional muster under [intermediate scrutiny] is. The Government denies that the subscriber limits provision is content based.
Were convicted on various criminal charges. Some of which were common and others less so. The fact that the trial may not have been This opinion is being released in typescript. A printed version will follow. * 2 Nos. 06 3517 & 06 3528 picture perfect is. It is our job. To decide whether any of the court's rulings so impaired the fairness and reliability of the proceeding that the only permissible remedy is a new trial. Their primary emphasis is on specific issues about the jury. They contend that the verdict was tainted by jurors' use of extraneous legal materials. Including the arguments that the exclusion of certain evidence was an
Were convicted on various criminal charges. Some of which were common and others less so. The fact that the trial may not have been This opinion is being released in typescript. A printed version will follow. * 2 Nos. 06 3517 & 06 3528 picture perfect is. It is our job. To decide whether any of the court's rulings so impaired the fairness and reliability of the proceeding that the only permissible remedy is a new trial. Their primary emphasis is on specific issues about the jury. They contend that the verdict was tainted by jurors' use of extraneous legal materials. Including the arguments that the exclusion of certain evidence was an
OPINION/ORDER
Were convicted on various criminal charges. Some of which were common and others less so. The fact that the OE This opinion was originally released in typescript on August 21. 2007. 2 Nos. 06 3517 & 06 3528 trial may not have been picture perfect is. It is our job. To decide whether any of the court's rulings so impaired the fairness and reliability of the proceeding that the only permissible remedy is a new trial. Their primary emphasis is on specific issues about the jury. They contend that the verdict was tainted by jurors' use of extraneous legal materials. Including the arguments that the exclusion of certain evidence was an
Which criminalizes the dissemination by computer of material that is harmful to minors. Had demonstrated that they were likely to succeed on the merits of their claim that section . Which provides as follows:
30 37 3.2 Dissemination of material that is harmful to a minor by computer
A. Dissemination of material that is harmful to a minor by computer consists of the use of a computer communications system that allows the input. Whoever commits dissemination of material that is harmful to a minor by computer is guilty of a misdemeanor.
The statute provides the following defenses:
In a prosecution for dissemination of material that is harmful to a minor by computer. It is a defense that the defendant has:
in good faith taken reasonable. Including any method that is feasible with available technology.
Perry argued the cause for petitioner Greg Ruggiero.
OPINION/ORDER
With him on the briefs was Barbara J. With him on the briefs were Robert S. We hold that the provision and its implementing regulation fail to meet this standard and are therefore unconstitutional. The Commission concluded that the Class D stations were impeding expansion of more efficient high power operations. Opting to
OPINION/ORDER
Some of the video footage was used by ABC in a PrimeTime Live broadcast that was sharply critical of Food Lion. 402 was entered on the various claims. I. In early 1992 producers of ABC's PrimeTime Live program received a report alleging that Food Lion stores were engaging in unsanitary meat handling practices. The allegations were that Food Lion employees ground out of date beef together with new beef. ABC reporters Lynne Dale (Lynne Litt at the time) and Susan Barnett concluded that they would have a better 5 chance of investigating the allegations if they could become Food Lion employees. Some of the videotape was eventually used in a November 5. The truth of the PrimeTime Live broadcast was not an issue in the litigation we now describe. Food Lion sought to recover (1) administrative costs and wages paid in connection with the employment of Dale and Barnett and (2) broadcast (publication) damages for matters such as loss of good will. Punitive damages were also requested by Food Lion. Diminished stock value or anything of that nature
That ABC and Willson therefore were liable for injuries that appellees suffered as a result of the story. We conclude that ABC and Willson are entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Was insufficient to establish one of the elements of appellees' claim: that ABC and Willson broadcast the story with actual malice. Were engaged in the business of organizing and managing commercial real estate limited partnerships. The idea behind these partnerships was that small investors. It was anticipated that the partnerships would hold onto the properties for a period of time ranging from between four to nine years and then sell the properties and distribute the proceeds among the investors. There was a severe nationwide decline in the value of real estate. The properties held by Levan's limited partnerships were no exception. Levan and BFC offered their limited partners the two exchanges that are at the center of this dispute. Which were completed in 1989 and 1991. Were of a type referred to in the industry as a
That ABC and Willson therefore were liable for injuries that appellees suffered as a result of the story. We conclude that ABC and Willson are entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Was insufficient to establish one of the elements of appellees' claim: that ABC and Willson broadcast the story with actual malice. Were engaged in the business of organizing and managing commercial real estate limited partnerships. The idea behind these partnerships was that small investors. It was anticipated that the partnerships would hold onto the properties for a period of time ranging from between four to nine years and then sell the properties and distribute the proceeds among the investors. There was a severe nationwide decline in the value of real estate. The properties held by Levan's limited partnerships were no exception. Levan and BFC offered their limited partners the two exchanges that are at the center of this dispute. Which were completed in 1989 and 1991. Were of a type referred to in the industry as a
OPINION/ORDER
We will affirm. Inc. has been manufacturing and distributing commercial electronic security control systems since 1967.1 Its devices are designed to track the physical location of goods and are sold to retailers to prevent merchandise theft. It is one of the two dominant manufacturers in the retail security products market. Which is registered with the United States Trademark office.2 1. Our recitation of the facts will be brief. Its principal and most successful products are electronic article surveillance systems designed to alert retailers when items are removed from confined areas. The systems work by placing circuited tags on merchandise which are deactivated at the time of sale. If the tags are not deactivated. Checkpoint Systems also manufactures electronic access control systems in the form of security cards that permit selected personnel to have access to restricted areas. Checkpoint Systems intends to use these electronic access control systems to make
They noticed that Thompson was lying behind the sales counter and that she was apparently injured. The boys saw that blood was flowing out of a knife wound in her neck. Thompson was gasping for air and waiving her hand wildly. There was also blood on the counter and on the sides of the cash register.
They noticed that Thompson was lying behind the sales counter and that she was apparently injured. The boys saw that blood was flowing out of a knife wound in her neck. Thompson was gasping for air and waiving her hand wildly. There was also blood on the counter and on the sides of the cash register.
OPINION/ORDER
Introduction The question presented in this appeal is whether pretrial publicity denied John Goss a fair trial. Which is located in Meade County in the southwest part of the state on the Oklahoma border. She was shot and killed in her parents' home. The population of Meade County was approximately 5. The population of Plains was approximately 1. The murder was the first in Meade County in more than seventy years. The victim and her family were well known and respected members of the community. He was found two weeks later hiding in a small town in northwestern Oklahoma. Factual and Procedural Background The essential facts underlying Goss's crimes are not in dispute. As Janice was preparing to leave for work. As [Goss] was attempting to start the vehicle. An ambulance was called but Janice died before it arrived. A fruitless manhunt was organized. [Goss] was arrested in Tyrone. The second motion to change venue was heard only one month before trial. Goss called nine witnesses whose names were chosen at random from the local phonebook.
OPINION/ORDER
The printer was not willing to take the risk that it would not be paid (the paper relies on student activity funds). No. 01 4155 3 the editorial staff was unwilling to submit to prior review. Have continued the debate in court. The district court thought that decision limited to papers published by high school students as part of course work and inapplicable to student newspapers edited by college students as extracurricular activities and the judge added that these distinctions are so clearly established that no reasonable person in Carter's position could have thought herself entitled to pull the plug on the Innovator. The threshold question is:
OPINION/ORDER
At issue on appeal is whether the District Court correctly concluded that the scope of that prior order did not reach Bach to Rock's conduct of advertising over the Internet on its web site. Because this is a non precedential opinion and we write only for the parties. Our factual recitation is brief. Jacobs Music is a piano and other keyboard instrument retailer. Bach to Rock is a competitor in the business of selling pianos to the general public. Jacobs Music alleged that these claims were false and misleading because Bach to Rock stocked few pianos of the brands named and the new pianos available were lower quality instruments. Jacobs Music also alleged that Bach to Rock's practice was to lure potential customers to its sales venues with misleading advertising and then pressure customers to purchase the low quality instruments without comparison shopping by misrepresenting both the quality of the instruments and the limited time period during which the instruments would be available at the special price offered.
OPINION/ORDER
Sher was on brief. Was on brief. Stephen Diaz Gavin was on brief for the intervenor. WDMV was losing money because of the competition. WDMV was likely to go off the air if it was not sold and Brinklow did not have a local station. The Assignment Application advised the Commission that Birach's obligations under the purchase agreement were con tingent on the Commission's approval of the Birach Applica tion. Stating that it was unable to obtain the transmitter site specified in the Brinklow Application. The WDMV license that Birach acquired from Five Star was scheduled to expire on October 1. Was the reason it
OPINION/ORDER
Which are circulated in the area around Baltimore. Its primary office is located in downtown Baltimore. Employees in the mechanical and nonmechanical departments have elected to be included in the Union's bargaining unit. While the efforts of these employees have focused historically on the production of The Sun and The Sunday Sun. The employees have also had responsibility for publishing other documents on a regular basis. Other employees of the Company are represented by other unions. Still others are not represented by any union. When the Company and the Union were completing negotiations for a new collective bargaining agreement. The Company was in the preliminary stages of developing the
OPINION/ORDER
With him on the briefs was Dennis F. With her on the brief were John A. We affirm the refusal because the Commission's determination that the appellant is not a new entrant rests upon a reasonable interpretation of its own regulations. When the Commission receives license or permit applications that are mutually exclusive (such as applications for the same frequency in the same area). MCBI submitted the high bid and was declared the winner. MCBI's bid also sought a new entrant bidding credit (NEBC) notwithstanding that MCBI was already the owner of three other FM broadcast stations. MCBI believed it was eligible for the credit because its other stations were noncommercial educational stations (NCEs). Because it read the Commission's rules as excluding such stations for the purpose of determining whether a bidder is a new entrant. Made it ineligible for a new entrant Hunt also argued that MCBI's application should be denied on the ground that MCBI was not financially qualified. As we have said many times.
OPINION/ORDER
Circuit Judge: Plaintiffs are engaged in the commercial recording. Inc. (
OPINION/ORDER
Circuit Judge: Plaintiffs are engaged in the commercial recording. Inc. (
OPINION/ORDER
2001 in this appeal is amended as follows: 4222 Slip opinion at 2196. Nimmer On Copyright §§ 12.04[A][2] & [A][2][b] (2000) (confining Sony to contributory infringement analysis:
OPINION/ORDER
Circuit Judge: Plaintiffs are engaged in the commercial recording. Inc. (
OPINION/ORDER
2001 in this appeal is amended as follows: 4222 Slip opinion at 2196. Nimmer On Copyright §§ 12.04[A][2] & [A][2][b] (2000) (confining Sony to contributory infringement analysis:
OPINION/ORDER
Circuit Judge: Plaintiffs are engaged in the commercial recording. Inc. (
OPINION/ORDER
With them on the briefs were John L. Prabhu were on the brief of amici curiae The Association for Competitive Technology and Computing Technology Industry Association in support of appellant. Burton was on the brief for amicus curiae Center for the Moral Defense of Capitalism in support of appellant. Getman was on the brief for amicus curiae Association for Objective Law in support of appellant. With them on the brief were A. Naughton were on the brief for amici curiae America Online. Was on the brief for amicus curiae Lee A. Was on the brief for amicus curiae Carl Lundgren. There are three principal aspects of this appeal. Because the substantive provisions of the order are flawed. Microsoft asserts that the trial judge committed ethical violations by engaging in impermissible ex parte contacts and making inappropriate public comments on the merits of the case while it was pending. The oral arguments before this court we find that some but not all of Microsoft's liability challenges have merit. There are several reasons supporting this conclusion.
The latter defeated by the absence of a proper plea for special damages which was not achieved in its motion for relief from judgment. Is a development stage company. Which promotes business ventures by selling stock to raise capital.
OPINION/ORDER
This case was brought under the Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act by the Washington Post Company and its wholly owned subsidiary Washingtonpost.Newsweek Interactive Company. Purdy1 from appropriating Internet domain names2 that incorporate and are confusingly similar to their trademarks and servicemarks. Purdy was later found in contempt and fined for violating the injunctions. I. Both the common law and Congress have provided protection to the holders of recognized trademarks to prevent others from appropriating or copying them and taking advantage of the owner's good will for their own benefit. One legislative purpose of that act was to ensure that
OPINION/ORDER
FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY The underlying facts are not in dispute. We have reviewed both tapes. All other pending motions are denied. 2 Under 21 U.S.C. § 321. Is a
OPINION/ORDER
FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY The underlying facts are not in dispute. We have reviewed both tapes. All other pending motions are denied. 2 Under 21 U.S.C. § 321. Is a
OPINION/ORDER
P.C. were on brief. Burling were on brief. Flom LLP were on brief. Was on brief. Were on brief. Chief Judge.
OPINION/ORDER
With him on the briefs were Richard B. With him on the brief were Michelle M. Fred Wertheimer. 2 Trevor Potter was on the brief for amici curiae John McCain. Federal campaign finance law is complex. BCRA is no exception. Though few of its details are important to this litigation (and those that are we describe later in our analysis).
Six year old JonBenet Ramsey was murdered inside her home in Boulder. Was one of the first officers to arrive at the crime scene. Was the only officer present when the child's body was found. Arndt was involved in the murder investigation until she was removed from the case in May 1997 by defendant Thomas Koby. Then the Boulder Police Chief.
While she was involved in the investigation. Arndt and other officers involved in the Ramsey murder investigation were widely criticized in the media. She asserts that these criticisms were false and harmed her reputation. The letter stated that:
[N]o one within the Department has made any effort of which we are aware to stand behind Linda publicly. By a continuous series of statements about one thing or another that she supposedly did that are simply false.
Def.'s Ex. Based on the fact that she was prevented by the gag order from publicly responding to the allegedly false and harmful media statements about her.
OPINION/ORDER
Lusingo argues that the BIA's ruling denying his asylum claim is
OPINION/ORDER
Procter & Hoar were on brief for appellee. At the time Regina was employed as a flight attendant. Had been separated for four months and were living apart. It is not known whether Regina is alive or dead. Later in the same year the Browns were divorced in a Connecticut state court. The state court trial was prolonged and a detailed opinion was written by the trial judge pertaining to custody and support. Found that Willis believed deeply but without basis that his wife was unfaithful to him. The trial was widely reported in the press. This was due partly to further litigation and the continuing police investigation. Fragments of her bone were found in a nearby river. Her pilot husband was convicted in the so called woodchipper murder. It was prepared by Mary Richardson. The broadcast opens with the leitmotif
OPINION/ORDER
We must determine what role likelihood of confusion plays in a trademark infringement case where the defendant claims that its use was nominative and fair. LT contends that its use was nominative and fair.
OPINION/ORDER
We must determine what role likelihood of confusion plays in a trademark infringement case where the defendant claims that its use was nominative and fair. LT contends that its use was nominative and fair.
OPINION/ORDER
A. The Parties Plaintiff Tai Kwan Cureton is an African American who graduated from Simon Gratz High School in Philadelphia in June 1996 ranking 27th in a class of 305 students. Cureton was a member of the track team and earned both academic and athletic honors as a high school student. The SAT is a nationally recognized standardized test. Have emphasized the SAT in this action so we discuss only that test. 5 Plaintiff Leatrice Shaw is an African American who also graduated from Simon Gratz High School and was ranked 5th in a class of 305 students. Shaw was a member of the track team and earned both academic and athletic honors and was selected for membership in the National Honor Society. She was unable to compete on the track team during her freshman year because of the NCAA regulations at issue here. Plaintiffs Andrea Gardner and Alexander Wesby are African American student athletes who exceeded the NCAA minimum GPA requirement for freshman year athletic participation. Though they originally were not parties.
OPINION/ORDER
Two of these boys—now adults—were located. Riccardi was tried before a jury and convicted on January 23. Riccardi was sentenced to a total term of 262 months. He contends that he was not sentenced in accordance with the law. Which he contends violated the Fourth Amendment for two independent reasons: (1) there was no probable cause to justify the search and seizure of the hard drive. Riccardi argues that the district court should have dismissed Count Two because it involved intrastate non economic activity and therefore is not subject to Congress' legislative authority under the Commerce Clause. Riccardi argues that there was insufficient evidence to sustain his conviction on Count One because there was not enough evidence to show that the individuals depicted in the images were under 18 years of age. He contends that Counts Three and Five are invalid because the prosecution put on no evidence to show that Mr. Riccardi moved to supplement his brief with an argument that the sentencing procedure was constitutionally defective under Blakely v.
The sole issue on appeal is whether the district court erred in sentencing by applying a two level enhancement for possession of ten or more
OPINION/ORDER
Following Movants' appeal of this denial of injunctive relief is pending a trial before the court and an advisory jury. The Democratic and Republican candidates for United States Representative for Iowa's First Congressional District will appear on Iowa Press. Marcus is the Natural Law Party of Iowa (NLP) candidate for United States Representative in Iowa's Third Congressional District. Rusk is the Working Class Party candidate for United States Representative in Iowa's Third Congressional District. Cuddehe is the NLP candidate for United States Representative in Iowa's First Congressional District. Dimick is the NLP candidate for United States Representative in Iowa's Fifth Congressional District. Lamoureux is the NLP candidate for United States Representative in Iowa's Second Congressional District. Gratzon is the NLP candidate for the United States Senate in Iowa. Susan Marcus is a registered voter in Iowa who wishes to see these aforementioned political candidates debate with Democratic. The Democratic and Republican candidates for United States Representative for Iowa's Fourth Congressional District will appear on Iowa Press. broadcasting at 1. these Movants have brought this motion for emergency appearances
OPINION/ORDER
TMJI is a Colorado corporation that manufactures prosthetic total and partial temporomandibular joint (TMJ) implants for use in patients suffering from TMJ disorders. They have filed one brief as the CIGNA appellees. Aetna states that it will not cover either the total or partial TMJ implants manufactured by TMJI. In a similar bulletin CIGNA states that it will not cover TMJI's partial joint device. The district court granted the motions on the ground that the bulletins were protected statements of opinion. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. 1291 and affirm. The total joint prosthesis is available in three sizes (for both the right and left sides of the jaw) and can also be custom made. The partial joint prosthesis is available in 44 premade sizes (for both sides of the jaw). TMJI is the only manufacturer of a partial joint prosthesis. 000 of TMJI's devices have been implanted in patients. 40% of which have been partial joint prostheses. Clinical studies have shown that the partial joint implants
OPINION/ORDER
Circuit Judge: There is no reason inherent in the technological features of cyberspace why First Amendment and defamation law should apply differently in cyberspace than in the brick and mortar world. Has chosen for policy reasons to immunize from liability for defamatory or obscene speech
OPINION/ORDER
This is an appeal from the Board of Immigration Appeals' (
OPINION/ORDER
Plaintiffs' core allegation is that Merrill Lynch. Recommended that investors purchase certain publicly traded stocks even though they did not then believe that the issuing companies were a good investment. The district court ruled that the complaints were time barred and (even if not timebarred) that they fail to plead loss causation as required by the decisions of this Court. We conclude that the underlying complaints were timely filed. Even though the analysts did not then believe that those companies were a good investment. It is alleged that analysts were touted to investors as independent assessors of business prospects. Judge Pollack concluded: [i] that the suits were time barred and (in any event) that they fail [ii] to plead loss causation. We conclude that the underlying complaints were timely filed. The NYAG's papers cited dozens of internal communications that expressed bluntly negative views on internet stocks that the Firm's analysts were then recommending to the investing public. Some 140 class action complaints were filed.
OPINION/ORDER
With him on the briefs was Christopher Landau. Jr. were on the brief of amici curiae Dow Jones & Company. With him on the brief was Louis K. The issue on appeal is whether undisputed facts prove that Representative James A. At the time of the conversation Gingrich was the subject of an investigation by the House Committee on Standards of Official Conduct. Representative Boehner was chairman of the 3 House Republican Conference. Representative Boehner was driving through Florida when he joined the conference call. The tape was forwarded to Thurman's Washington office. Representative McDermott was the ranking Democrat on the Ethics Committee. The letter stated: Enclosed in the envelope you will find a tape of a conversation heard December 21. The call was a conference call heard over a scanner. We felt the information included were of importance to the committee. We were advised by her to turn the tape directly over to you. We also understand that we will be granted immunity. We pray that committee will consider our sincerity in placing it in your hands.
OPINION/ORDER
Is a professional photographer who has copyrighted many of his images of the American West. Some of these images are located on Kelly's web site or other web sites with which Kelly has a license agreement. When Kelly discovered that his photographs were part of Arriba's search engine database. The creation and use of the thumbnails in the search engine is a fair use. The display of the larger image is a violation of Kelly's exclusive right to publicly display his works. I. The search engine at issue in this case is unconventional in that it displays the results of a user's query as
With him on the briefs were Peter Keisler. Joffe and Henk Brands were on the briefs for
petitioner Time Warner Entertainment Co. Leanza and Harold
Feld were on the briefs for petitioner Consumers Union.
OPINION/ORDER
With him on the briefs were Peter Keisler. Joffe and Henk Brands were on the briefs for petitioner Time Warner Entertainment Co. Leanza and Harold Feld were on the briefs for petitioner Consumers Union. With him on the brief were Christopher J. Frederick Beckner III were on the brief for intervenor Time Warner Entertainment Co. The first type is horizontal. Addressing operators' scale:
Contending that Moody's evaluation was materially false. It reasoned that Moody's article was protected by the First Amendment because it neither stated nor implied an assertion that was provably false. BACKGROUND
Because we are reviewing the district court's decision to grant Moody's motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim. Concluding that
OPINION/ORDER
We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. 849 (1997) (stating that an estimated 200 million people were expected to use the Internet in 1999). In sharp contrast to traditional mass marketing where the target audience is constantly exposed to advertisements in which they have no interest.
OPINION/ORDER
We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. 849 (1997) (stating that an estimated 200 million people were expected to use the Internet in 1999). In sharp contrast to traditional mass marketing where the target audience is constantly exposed to advertisements in which they have no interest.
OPINION/ORDER
The issues on which Coplin sought injunctive and declaratory relief were to be presented in a bench trial while the monetary damages and attorney's fees claims were to be heard. I. The FPATV Committee is a regulatory and advisory board created by the Council. The primary responsibility of the FPATV Committee is to supervise. To have the case tried by a United States Magistrate Judge. 2 1 Under FPATV Rule I(A).
OPINION/ORDER
BACKGROUND Toney is a dog dealer who resides in Iowa and does business in Iowa. Who had registered with and was licensed On or about May 20. Owners of dogs who believed that their pets may have been stolen and sold to research laboratories as well as Toney and another USDA licensed dog dealer. WCCO's report stated that: So these animals that are
OPINION/ORDER
Norval Williams was employed by the St. He was fired after he made a comment in the media questioning the guilt of an individual who had been convicted of killing a police officer. Was hired by then St. Williams' responsibilities was to oversee security for the St. An African American youth who was tried before an all white jury for the murder of a white South Bend police officer. At some time during the trial or after the verdict was returned. Williams commented to television and newspaper reporters that
This document was created from RTF source by rtftohtml version 2.7.5 > Mills v. Jr. is a Florida prison inmate. Florida.<a href=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="131"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/dc/opinions/9_opinions/90-3222a.html">USA V. CHILDRESS<BR></A><BR>
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="131"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=96-1670.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Should form the continuation of the paragraph that currently is at page 6. Were on brief for appellant Penobscot Indian Nation and third party defendants appellees. Were on brief for appellee and cross appellant Key Bank of Maine. Were on brief for appellee Michael Marcello. Taintor & Abbott was on brief for defendants appellees and cross appellants. P.A. was on brief for defendant appellee and cross appellant. Hewey with whom Drummond Woodsum & MacMahon was on brief for appellees Consumers Water Company. It is not apparent from the record that the results of the investigation were set out in writing or were made known to the public. It is clear. The complaint alleged that the two Settlement Agreements signed by PIN and the Appellees were void because they did not receive the Secretary of the Interior's approval pursuant to 25 U.S.C. Together with the affidavits . . . show that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that the moving party is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="131"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//aug95/88-3945.man.html">MILLS V. SINGLETARY<BR></A><BR>
This document was created from RTF source by rtftohtml version 2.7.5 > <title>Mills v. Jr. is a Florida prison inmate. Florida.<a href=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="131"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200213281.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Challenge the district court's grant of summary judgment to Warner Bros. on their claim that the Picture's portrayal of their father was so egregiously false and offensive as to allow them to bring a false light invasion of privacy claim. Because we are unsure of the proper reach of Fla. The fishing vessel known as the Andrea Gail was caught in this storm and lost at sea. Were presumed to have been killed. The book was published in 1997. Who were main characters in the film. It also included brief portrayals of each individual that is a party to this appeal. Was portrayed as a down and out swordboat captain who was obsessed with the next big catch. It did indicate at the beginning of the film that
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="130"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/366485B2D9C9A6F888256E5A00707AF9/$file/0050033.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
His conduct was not an enumerated offense under California law. An individual cannot be compelled to register as a sex offender.1 1 Davidson also claims that California Penal Code § 290 is unconstitutional as applied to him. Because we find Davidson is not compelled to register as a sex offender pursuant to California Penal Code § 290. Which was imposed after Davidson pleaded guilty in federal court to the knowing possession of child pornography
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="130"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/C12683A5D1D279D388256A33005ADA64/$file/0050033.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
His conduct was not an enumerated offense under California law. An individual cannot be compelled to register as a sex offender.1 1 Davidson also claims that California Penal Code § 290 is unconstitutional as applied to him. Because we find Davidson is not compelled to register as a sex offender pursuant to California Penal Code § 290. Which was imposed after Davidson pleaded guilty in federal court to the knowing possession of child pornography
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="130"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/994183.P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
He contends that when such acts are committed solely for a valid journalistic purpose. Most of that time was spent as a staff reporter or news director of radio stations in the Washington. Is currently working in television. He sought to determine whether child prostitution
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="130"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/fdocs/docs.fwx?submit=showbr&shofile=05-4244_020.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
He was sentenced to fifteen months imprisonment and ordered to pay $19. He was also a paying customer of CWWIS. When a police officer who was executing a search warrant at Schuster's house disconnected his computer. Finding that the loss amount and restitution amount were both $19. The district court determined that Schuster's total offense level was fourteen and the guideline imprisonment range was fifteen to twenty one months. Our review of a district court's sentencing decision is deferential. We review the district court's assessment of the amount of loss for clear error and will reverse
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="127"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=97-1329.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Hanson & DeTroy were on brief. Friedman and Friedman & Babcock were on brief. Inevitably means that much offensive and inaccurate speech will remain free from legal constraints. There are boundaries past which speakers cannot trespass. This case illustrates how difficult it is to trace those boundaries with the precision that the law demands. I. STORE WARS The events that gave rise to this litigation are controversial but. Is a family owned business that operates three retail clothing stores in Maine. Is the nation's largest retailer. It is a relative newcomer to the Maine marketplace. Olson testified that he thought Boardman was a college student researching a paper.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="125"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/05/01/033802P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Permits copyright owners and their representatives to obtain and serve subpoenas on internet service providers (ISPs) to obtain personal information about an ISP's subscribers who are alleged to be transmitting copyrighted works via the internet using so called
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="125"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/03/10/021757P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Keith Dwayne Nelson was sentenced to death. They left the A 1 parking lot in a white Ford F 150 pickup truck that Nelson was driving. Nelson also told Robinson that he wanted to do this because he was going back to prison for other charges and that he wanted to go back for something big. He decided not to contact the police because he thought that Nelson must have been joking. Just three days later Michanne Mattson was attacked outside of her apartment building. Mattson was driving home from a friend's house in the early morning when she passed a white pickup truck parked alongside the road. Exclaiming that she had better shut up and that he was going to kill her. That now was the time to do it. Ten year old Pamela Butler was rollerblading in the street near her residence in the same area. The witness was able to write down the license plate number of the truckMissouri plate number 177 CE2. The truck was gone. The truck was found abandoned the next day in Kansas City. A police dog that had been provided with some of Pamela's clothing was dispatched to Nelson's mother's house and alerted to an afghan found inside the residence.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="124"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/31F0472AE8A769E588257013007DAC1B/$file/0235971nographic.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Appellants filed lawsuits in the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington seeking damages for the constitutional rights that were alleged to be violated by the emergency order. Four of the Appellants also filed individual claims in which they alleged that their constitutional rights were infringed by Seattle police officers in the course of the conference. We determine that the emergency order was a constitutional time. We also determine that there are genuine issues of material fact whether the emergency order was constitutional as applied to certain Appellants. Emily Maloney were also named plaintiffs in the lawsuit. They are not parties to this appeal. 1 5952 MENOTTI v. CITY OF SEATTLE All persons who were arrested by the City of Seattle and its police agents or its affiliated police agents on December 1 and 2. Pursuant to the defendants'
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="124"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/011953.U.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
RICHMOND NEWSPAPERS 3 Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Mastropaolo was a member of the Richmond Newspapers Professional Association. Although she attended the event for purely personal reasons (that is. She was not assigned by the newspaper to write a story about the festival). She was caught by a vendor on the second day of the festival and was arrested. Mastropaolo was charged with two felony counts of larceny. The attorney recommended that Mastropaolo plead guilty to the charges and explained that there was a strong likelihood that the judge at sentencing would reduce the felony charges to misdemeanors. Millsaps told her that if she pleaded guilty to or was convicted of a felony. They
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="124"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/96/07/951894P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
That injunctive relief is not available under the Act. We agree with McCaskill that she We was improperly barred from invoking the exceptions to the Act. That there was insufficient evidence to support the judgment against her. reverse and remand. $1000 in liquidated damages and ordered the return of the videotape. 22 I. Julia Flege was assaulted in public and brutally murdered. Wright was detained in connection with Flege's murder. He was. Although the manager was aware that the police desired a copy of the videotape of the assault. That Warren had the original tape but was about to leave town. Lewis failed to mention that Warren was still in town. Was abducted from the Liberty Memorial Mall. She was subsequently taken to the Santa Fe Apts.[. Where she was killed by her abductor. Detectives were advised that the tape could be reviewed but no copies would be released without a Court Order. Occurring at 2525 Main
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="122"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=03-1159.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Prevett</SPAN> and the <SPAN STYLE=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="122"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=03-2052.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Inc.</SPAN> were on brief for appellant third party witness James Taricani.</SPAN> <P><SPAN STYLE=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="121"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/199802/97-5017a.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Vladeck was on brief. Were on brief. (FOIA) of internet addresses and programming materials generated by the United States Information Agency (USIA).2 The district court granted summary judgment in favor of USIA on the ground that USIA's records
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="119"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200216215.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
It was alleged. Consisted of First Union and its analyst trying to obtain investment banking business from Ask Jeeves at the same time that they were supposed to be providing unbiased analysis on the company and its stock. This undisclosed conflict caused the analyst to tout the stock so that First Union would be looked upon favorably when Ask Jeeves decided who was going to get its investment banking business. Arguing in part that the securities fraud claim was timebarred and that the investors failed to sufficiently allege loss causation. Concluding that the investors who had purchased the stock at prices ranging from $78 to $134 per share were on inquiry notice of securities fraud when the stock dropped to $24 per share. We conclude that the complaint was not time barred on its face. Which are set out below. We will take judicial notice. Those prices are not subject to reasonable dispute. Are a proper subject for judicial notice. All references are to the per share closing prices of Ask Jeeves stock.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="119"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:8080/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcT1BOXDAwLTkxNTlfMm5kIEFtZW5kZWQucGRm/00-9159_2nd%20Amended.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
A poll on whether to rehear the case in banc was conducted among the active judges of the court upon the request of an active judge of the court. Rehearing in banc was DENIED by order of the court filed on February 11. The petition for rehearing was DENIED. Judges Straub and Pooler are filing a concurring opinion. Judges Sack and Katzmann are filing a concurring opinion. Chief Judge Walker is filing a dissenting opinion. Judge Jacobs is filing a dissenting opinion. Judge Cabranes is filing a dissenting opinion. Other judges of the court have indicated that they expect to file opinions concurring in the denial of in banc rehearing in due course. If further opinions or amended opinions are filed. This order will be amended as necessary to reflect those opinions. In light of the opinions that are being filed dissenting from this view. Is not whether the opinion for the panel majority or the dissent was right. Is indeed thorough and forceful. Assuming that it is as sound as the dissenters say that it is.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="119"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/Apr2001/992054.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="119"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/E64D5E6A0401273788256C39005336AA/$file/0055293.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Is amended as follows: The caption is changed to reflect the addition of Case No. 00 55599. This case number was inadvertently omitted from the opinion as filed. The question in this case is whether Thane has violated the federal trademark laws by its choice of name for its product. Trek products are sold through more than 1. Trek is the country's most popular and most respected bicycle brand. Trek was granted a United States trademark for the use of TREK on bicycles and bicycle frames. The most prominent athlete Trek sponsors is cancer survivor Lance Armstrong. Pictures of Armstrong with a TREK bicycle have appeared in The New York Times and on Wheaties boxes. Thane maintains that this venture was a failure. This stationary trainer would not have pedals. Because it is meant to be used while standing.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="119"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/192E3ECD8134788788256C2C00579F18/$file/0055293.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The question in this case is whether Thane has violated the federal trademark laws by its choice of name for its product. Trek products are sold through more than 1. Trek is the country's most popular and most respected bicycle brand. Trek was granted a United States trademark for the use of TREK on bicycles and bicycle frames. The most prominent athlete Trek sponsors is cancer survivor Lance Armstrong. Pictures of Armstrong with a TREK bicycle have appeared in The New York Times and on Wheaties boxes. Thane maintains that this venture was a failure. This stationary trainer would not have pedals. Because it is meant to be used while standing. 13384 THANE INT'L v.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="118"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/01/07/001411P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
2 through companies of which he is the chairman and president. A jury found Matrisciana liable and judgment was entered in favor of the officers. Which was released in May of 1996. The only reference to Campbell and Lane is found in a narrated graphic toward the video's end: SUSPECTS IMPLICATED IN IVES/HENRY MURDERS AND COVER UP DAN HARMON. Here the lines between fact and fiction are blurred. Were found on railroad tracks in a secluded area in Saline County. The train crew reported that the boys appeared to have been lying on the tracks. Their deaths were ruled accidental. Later their bodies were exhumed and a second autopsy was conducted by a physician from Atlanta. The cause of death on their death certificates was changed to homicide. They were first killed and their bodies then laid on the tracks to make their deaths appear accidental. Who was appointed special prosecutor on the case.4 At one point.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="117"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/10circuit/aug96/95-5006.wpd.html">CARDTOONS, L.C. V. MAJOR LEAGUE BASEBALL PLAYERS ASSOC.<BR></A><BR>
Arguing that (1) the district court lacked jurisdiction to issue a declaratory judgment and (2) Cardtoons does not have a First Amendment right to market its trading cards. Have caricatures of active major league baseball players on the front and humorous commentary about their careers on the back. The balance of the set is comprised of 20
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="117"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:8080/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcT1BOXDA0LTIzNzYtY3YgdyBFcnJhdGEucGRm/04-2376-cv%20w%20Errata.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The judgment is vacated and the case is remanded for further proceedings. Karedes was the manager of a public golf course undergoing renovations in the Village of The Honorable John Gleeson. Some of the renovations were to be paid for by the Village and some by a local charity that hosts a professional golf tournament at the course. It is alleged that Karedes re directed invoices sent by contractors who were confused about which entity to bill for what and sent to the Village for payment some invoices that were mistakenly issued to the charity. The district court granted the motions to dismiss filed by Press & Sun Bulletin under Rule 12(b)(6) and by News Channel 34 under Rule 12(c) on the ground that the reports at issue were substantially true and therefore not defamatory. Karedes appeals We conclude that a reasonable jury could find the reports to have defamatory 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 meaning. BACKGROUND Because Karedes' claims were dismissed on motions addressed to the pleadings.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="117"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200413575.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
They are not entitled to such immunity in this case because Weissman's complaint relates to private commercial conduct not mandated by the Act. Weissman's motion to dismiss this appeal for lack of jurisdiction was granted in part by prior order dated October 13. Over which we have jurisdiction. If Appellants' immunity claim is meritorious. They will necessarily be insulated from pre trial discovery. 2 1 * BACKGROUND Between December 2000 and June 2002. Weissman's complaint was initially dismissed for failure to allege diversity of citizenship. 2 emphasizing that
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="115"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200415341.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The district court held that Almeida's right of publicity claim under § 540.08 and common law is preempted by the Communications Decency Act of 1996 (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="114"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/dc/opinions/93opinions/93-5178a.html">ACTION FOR CHILDS TV V. FCC<BR></A><BR>
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="113"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200606/05-3161a.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
With her on the briefs was Thomas G. With her on the brief were Kenneth L. Senior Circuit Judge: Appellant Roger James Sullivan pled guilty to one count of knowingly possessing child pornography images that were transported in interstate commerce via the Internet. Appellant moved to have his indictment dismissed by the District Court. Which was decided after the District Court's ruling. Or that was produced using materials that have been mailed. Appellant was indicted on one count of possession of ten or more items of child pornography that had been transported in interstate or foreign commerce by computer. The proffer of facts supporting the plea agreement is straightforward. Appellant was working for FOX News Productions in Washington. FOX is a broadcast and cable news network that produces and distributes news and information programs throughout the United States. Whose server is located in Herndon. The National Center for Missing and Exploited Children analyzed the pornography and determined that many of the images were downloaded from Eastern European and Russian Internet sites.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="113"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/870530A1FDABD79688256EE800580191/$file/0315698.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. When those johns are arrested. We hope that the only visit people make to our jail is a virtual visit.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="113"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/062163np.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
We will affirm. Who are already familiar with the facts of this case. We will restate those facts only as necessary for our analysis. Was a wholesale music and video distributor. Valley Media contracted with various internet vendors to fulfill retail contracts the internet vendors had with Massachusetts customers through what are known as
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="113"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/719C9463B6D4128F8825727D000259A0/$file/0650219.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
He was sentenced to an eight month term of imprisonment. Are not limited to. To the extent that such condition (1) is reasonably related to the factors set forth in section 3553(a)(1). (2) involves no greater deprivation of liberty than is reasonably necessary for the purposes set forth in section 3553(a)(2)(B). (3) is consistent with any pertinent policy statements issued by the Sentencing Commission pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 994(a). We have made clear that the government bears the burden of showing that a discretionary condition of supervised release is appropriate in a given case. We have also explained that the statutory requirement that conditions of supervised release be reasonably related to the factors set out in § 3553(a)(1). (a)(2)(D) does not mean that every condition must be reasonably related to every factor:
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="113"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/200106/00-1094b.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Have each petitioned for rehearing. All but MMTC seek rehearing of the court's decision not to sever Option B from the Commis sion's EEO rule after holding that only that aspect of the challenged rule was unconstitutional. Only the UCC and the Intervenors seek rehearing of the court's underlying conclusion that Option B is unconstitutional.* The only issue about which the various petitions raise any points that were not fully considered in our prior opinion is the severability of Option B. The dissent re peatedly claims the Commission's only goal is
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="113"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/021145.U.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Was the actual signatory to the Agreement. Inc. d/b/a Winston Salem Journal not Piedmont was the proper defendant. It is Media General that has appealed the district court's summary judgment award. The Union is the local affiliate of the Communication Workers of America (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="113"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/fdocs/docs.fwx?submit=showbr&shofile=05-1314_019.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
That a distributed file sharing system is engaged in contributory copyright infringement when its principal object is the dissemination of copyrighted material. The foundation of this holding is a belief that people who post or download music files are primary infringers. She contends that her activities were fair use rather than infringement. A
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="113"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/dc/opinions/00opinions/00-1094b.html">MD DC DE BCASTR ASSN V. FCC<BR></A><BR>
Have each petitioned for rehearing.<span style=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="112"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/011151.P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Line 25 the reference to
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="112"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/58AF00C2122345DD88256DB7005BFAA3/$file/0270518.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Also were on the briefs. Wilson also were on the briefs. Also were on the briefs. Also were on the briefs. Also were on the brief. Blum also were on the brief. Also were on the brief. Also were on the brief. Also were on the brief. Also were on the brief. I Over half of the households in the United States have Internet connections. A Nation Online: How Americans Are Expanding Their Use of the Internet at 2 (Feb. 2002). Available at http:// www.ntia.doc.gov/ntiahome/dn/anationonline2.pdf (hereinafter
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="111"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/199807/97-7129a.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
With whom Joanne Royce was on the briefs. Were on the brief. I. Background O'Donnell's account of the events surrounding his transfer and demotion is set out below. Many of the facts he recounts are fiercely contested by the defendants. The facts on the basis of which the district court granted summary judgment are not contested. He was appointed D.C. This was a very senior position. Including the Homicide Branch (a fact whose importance will soon become clear). Soulsby was
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="111"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:8080/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcT1BOXDAwLTkxNTlfTF9vcmRlci5wZGY=/00-9159_L_order.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
A poll on whether to rehear the case in banc was conducted among the active judges of the court upon the request of an active judge of the court. Rehearing in banc was DENIED by order of the court filed February 11. The petition for rehearing was DENIED. Chief Judge Walker is filing a dissenting opinion. Judge Jacobs is filing a dissenting opinion. Judge Cabranes is filing a dissenting opinion. Other judges of the court have indicated that they expect to file opinions concurring in the denial of in banc rehearing in due course. If further opinions or amended opinions are filed. This order will be amended as necessary to reflect those opinions. Held that those limits were supported by a compelling interest. The full court should have reheard this case in banc. The panel unanimously upheld the district court's determination that the Vermont statute's limitation on out of state contributions was unconstitutional. The panel was divided. Would have upheld the district court's determination that campaign expenditure limits are unconstitutional under Buckley v.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="111"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:8080/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcT1BOXDAwLTkxNTlMb3JkZXIucGRm/00-9159Lorder.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
A poll on whether to rehear the case in banc was conducted among the active judges of the court upon the request of an active judge of the court. Rehearing in banc was DENIED by order of the court filed February 11. The petition for rehearing was DENIED. Chief Judge Walker is filing a dissenting opinion. Judge Jacobs is filing a dissenting opinion. Judge Cabranes is filing a dissenting opinion. Other judges of the court have indicated that they expect to file opinions concurring in the denial of in banc rehearing in due course. If further opinions or amended opinions are filed. This order will be amended as necessary to reflect those opinions. Held that those limits were supported by a compelling interest. The full court should have reheard this case in banc. The panel unanimously upheld the district court's determination that the Vermont statute's limitation on out of state contributions was unconstitutional. The panel was divided. Would have upheld the district court's determination that campaign expenditure limits are unconstitutional under Buckley v.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="111"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:8080/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcT1BOXDAwLTkxNTlMb3JkZXIucGRm/00-9159Lorder.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
A poll on whether to rehear the case in banc was conducted among the active judges of the court upon the request of an active judge of the court. Rehearing in banc was DENIED by order of the court filed February 11. The petition for rehearing was DENIED. Chief Judge Walker is filing a dissenting opinion. Judge Jacobs is filing a dissenting opinion. Judge Cabranes is filing a dissenting opinion. Other judges of the court have indicated that they expect to file opinions concurring in the denial of in banc rehearing in due course. If further opinions or amended opinions are filed. This order will be amended as necessary to reflect those opinions. Held that those limits were supported by a compelling interest. The full court should have reheard this case in banc. The panel unanimously upheld the district court's determination that the Vermont statute's limitation on out of state contributions was unconstitutional. The panel was divided. Would have upheld the district court's determination that campaign expenditure limits are unconstitutional under Buckley v.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="111"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/Aug1997/97a1677p.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The focus of the newspapers' attention is the putative misconduct of the government in publicly disclosing its sentencing memorandum which contained allegations of criminal conduct against several individuals who have not been charged with any crimes (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="111"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:8080/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcT1BOXDAwLTkxNTlMb3JkZXIucGRm/00-9159Lorder.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
A poll on whether to rehear the case in banc was conducted among the active judges of the court upon the request of an active judge of the court. Rehearing in banc was DENIED by order of the court filed February 11. The petition for rehearing was DENIED. Chief Judge Walker is filing a dissenting opinion. Judge Jacobs is filing a dissenting opinion. Judge Cabranes is filing a dissenting opinion. Other judges of the court have indicated that they expect to file opinions concurring in the denial of in banc rehearing in due course. If further opinions or amended opinions are filed. This order will be amended as necessary to reflect those opinions. Held that those limits were supported by a compelling interest. The full court should have reheard this case in banc. The panel unanimously upheld the district court's determination that the Vermont statute's limitation on out of state contributions was unconstitutional. The panel was divided. Would have upheld the district court's determination that campaign expenditure limits are unconstitutional under Buckley v.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="111"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:8080/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcT1BOXDA0LTY0ODAtY3Zfb3BuLnBkZg==/04-6480-cv_opn.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Do not constitutionally have the complete freedom of action enjoyed by a private employer.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="111"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:8080/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcT1BOXDA0LTAyNjMtY3Zfb3BuLnBkZg==/04-0263-cv_opn.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Circuit Judge: Appellants are freelance photographers and authors whose photographs and/or written works were originally published in various issues of the National Geographic Magazine. These photographs and writings have now been published in
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="111"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/971523.P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
I.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="110"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/dc/opinions/97opinions/97-1030a.html">SANGRE DE COMM INC V. FCC<BR></A><BR>
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="109"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/02/09/012730P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Finding defense trial counsel was not ineffective in failing to request a jury poll regarding a newspaper article during the trial and also finding no trial court error in failing to poll the jury regarding the mid trial publicity. Were each charged with murder and burglary. The three were then tried together. That will be your sworn duty if you are selected as a juror. If there is. Arguing the newspaper article was prejudicial to Tunstall in two respects. The article contained misstatements: (a) the headline was
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="108"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200313177.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Off duty conduct available for pay per view on the Internet is entitled to First Amendment protection. BACKGROUND Plaintiffs appellants Ronald Thaeter and Timothy Moran were deputy sheriffs with the Palm Beach County Sheriff's Office (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="108"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=98-2133.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
P.C. were on brief. With whom Palmer & Dodge LLP was on brief. Were on brief. Mindful that important First Amendment values are at stake. Microsoft is one of the most profitable companies in the computer industry. An operating system is the
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="106"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/200001/99-7097a.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
With him on the briefs were Richard J. With him on the brief were Robert F. The issues presented are whether the District Court may assert personal jurisdiction over the defendants and whether venue is proper in the District of Columbia (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="105"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200707/06-7095a.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="105"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.villanova.edu/locator/3d/Nov2002/022524.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
This civil action was brought in the District Court for the District of New Jersey by a consortium of media groups seeking access to
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="104"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/031469.P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
A. Media General is a Virginia newspaper publisher that operates a production facility in Mechanicsville. In relevant part: WE ARE VOTING YES! We have made a commitment and promise to ourselves. WE WILL NOT fall for the company's scare tactics! WE WILL NOT CHANGE OUR MINDS! WE WILL STAND BY OUR WORD! WE WILL VOTE YES!
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="103"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/034.U.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. OPINION PER CURIAM: Dennis Mitchell Orbe was convicted by a Virginia jury of capital murder. He was sentenced to death for the murder. The entire incident was captured on videotape by the store's security camera. The following facts are taken from the opinion of the Virginia Supreme Court on Orbe's direct appeal of his convictions and sentence: Near 3:38 a.m. on January 24. Walked up to the check out counter where Richard Sterling Burnett was working as a clerk. As Burnett was clutching his chest and struggling to remain in a standing position. Although Orbe was quickly identified as the gunman from the still images obtained from the videotape. He was not apprehended until January 31. Orbe was ultimately tried and convicted in York County of the capital murder of Burnett. A capital sentencing proceeding was then held. Orbe
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="103"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:8080/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcT1BOXDA0LTAyNjMtY3YgdyBFcnJhdGEucGRm/04-0263-cv%20w%20Errata.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Circuit Judge: Appellants are freelance photographers and authors whose photographs and/or written works were originally published in various issues of the National Geographic Magazine. These photographs and writings have now been published in
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="103"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/974924.U.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Were named in a multi count indictment arising out of their association with a violent
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="103"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200015158.opn.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
A. Justices of the Georgia Supreme Court are elected by popular vote.1 Ga. Monitors these judicial elections for compliance with Canon 7(B) of the Georgia Code of Judicial Conduct.3 Canon 7(B)(1)(d) provides that candidates for any judicial office that is filled by public election between competing candidates shall not use or participate in the use of any form of public communication which the candidate knows or reasonably should know is false. Or which contains a material misrepresentation of fact or law or omits a fact necessary to make the communication considered as a whole not materially All superior court and state court judges are also elected by popular vote. The JQC was created by constitutional amendment in 1972. It was vested with the
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="103"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/dc/opinions/95opinions/95-1048a.html">BECKER DANIEL V. FCC<BR></A><BR>
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="103"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/oct2002/00-15158.opn.html">WEAVER V. BONNER (10/18/2002, NO. 00-15158)<BR></A><BR>
Circuit Judge:</SPAN></P> <P><SPAN STYLE=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="103"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//oct2002/00-15158.opn.html">WEAVER V. BONNER (10/18/2002, NO. 00-15158)<BR></A><BR>
Circuit Judge:</SPAN></P> <P><SPAN STYLE=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="101"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/07a0225p-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The United States was engaged in a criminal investigation of Plaintiff Steven Warshak and the company he owned. (2)
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-1.gif" ALT="101"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200406/02-7155a.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="99"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/199802/96-3127a.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Was on the briefs. Were on the brief. Before he was apprehended. Was released in February 1993. He was taken into custody in Nigeria by United States authorities and brought to the United States for trial. As the air piracy statute under which he was prosecuted bars sequential prosecutions. As this provision only applies if certain additional jurisdictional re quirements are satisfied. (4) that his trial was fatally tainted by the introduction of evidence relating to the passengers' deaths. That this evidence should have been presented in a separate phase of the trial or. That it should have been presented in a less grisly form. (6) that the district court erred in assessing the restitution he was to pay to his victims as part of his sentence. (7) that the district court may have erred in its orders relating to the disclosure of classified government documents to the defense. The following account of the hijacking was not contested at Rezaq's trial. Rezaq is Palestinian. Was. He was accompanied by two other hijackers.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="99"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/200101/99-7221a.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
With him on the brief were Clifton S. Weyrich's complaint asserts that he was defamed by an article. The article is flowered with anecdotes that reveal Weyrich to be both emotionally volatile and short tempered.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="99"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/04a0369p-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Page 2 BACKGROUND Relators filed this qui tam false claims action in district court in October of 2000 alleging that the BioPort Corporation (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="99"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/Sept1995/95a1158p.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
We are called upon in this case principally to perform one of our most delicate duties determining whether Congress exceeded its constitutional authority in enacting a federal law. At issue is the power of Congress to criminalize
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="99"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=01-1643.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Reno</SPAN> were on brief. Barlow</SPAN> were on brief. P.C.</SPAN> were on brief. We vacate the jury's verdict on the false light claim and order an entry of judgment in favor of the defendant.</SPAN> <P><SPAN STYLE=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="99"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/dc/opinions/99opinions/99-7221a.html">PAUL WEYRICH V. THE NEW REPUBLIC, INC.<BR></A><BR>
With </p> <p>him on the brief were Clifton S. Weyrich's complaint asserts that he was defamed </p> <p>by an article. The article is flowered </p> <p>with anecdotes that reveal Weyrich to be both emotionally </p> <p>volatile and short tempered. Is used in the article </p> <p>as a popular. The </p> <p>author's musings on these scores are protected political com </p> <p>mentary. It is clear that his comments are </p> <p>meant only to deride Weyrich's political foibles and. </p> <p>assertions of mental derangement.</p> <p>There are other segments of the article. </p> <p>the anecdotes reported in the article are reasonably capable </p> <p>of defamatory meaning and arguably place Weyrich in a false </p> <p>light that would be highly offensive to a reasonable person. </p> <p>Thus. Because we find that some of the article's contested </p> <p>statements are both verifiable and reasonably capable of </p> <p>defamatory meaning. At least a portion of the complaint is </p> <p>sufficient to survive a Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="98"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/sept2002/01-11201.opn.html">HORSLEY V. FELDT (9/5/2002, NO. 01-11201)<BR></A><BR>
Circuit Judge:</SPAN></P> <P><SPAN STYLE=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="98"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//sept2002/01-11201.opn.html">HORSLEY V. FELDT (9/5/2002, NO. 01-11201)<BR></A><BR>
Circuit Judge:</SPAN></P> <P><SPAN STYLE=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="98"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/001680.P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Ullyot is removed from list of counsel
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="97"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/nov99/98-9079.man.html">ESTATE OF MARTIN LUTHER KING, JR., INC. V. CBS, INC. (11/5/1999, NO. 98-9079)<BR></A><BR>
Martin Luther King's famous
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="97"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//nov99/98-9079.man.html">ESTATE OF MARTIN LUTHER KING, JR., INC. V. CBS, INC. (11/5/1999, NO. 98-9079)<BR></A><BR>
Martin Luther King's famous
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="97"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//oct99/97-5587.man.html">DUNN V. AIR LINE PILOTS ASS'N (10/25/1999, NO. 97-5587)<BR></A><BR>
The court held on summary judgment that the description of the pilots as
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="97"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/oct99/97-5587.man.html">DUNN V. AIR LINE PILOTS ASS'N (10/25/1999, NO. 97-5587)<BR></A><BR>
The court held on summary judgment that the description of the pilots as
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="97"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/fdocs/docs.fwx?submit=showbr&shofile=05-1922_047.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Matthew Hale was convicted after a jury trial on two counts of obstructing justice. We have concluded that oral argument is unnecessary. The appeal is submitted on the briefs and the record. OEOE 2 No. 05 1922 entered against his white supremacist organization by United States District Judge Joan Humphrey Lefkow and his involvement in a plot to have the judge murdered. Hale was sentenced to a total of 480 months' imprisonment. I. Hale was the
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="97"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/05a0006n-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Plaintiff raises two issues: 1) the district court should have remanded the matter to state court because diversity jurisdiction was lacking. Each of these entities is a Michigan corporation or. Named as defendants were UMG Recordings. The lyrics that plaintiffs allege are defamatory can be found in a song written by Griffin called
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="97"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200405/00-1310b.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="96"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/002414.P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Is the owner of the well known Harrods of London department store. The defendants are 60 Internet domain names (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="96"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:8080/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcT1BOXDA0LTM0NDQtY3Zfb3BuLnBkZg==/04-3444-cv_opn.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Since BMI and Music Choice were unable to agree on a rate. The District Court reasoned that the price paid for music by retail customers that was the basis for the rate set under BMI's agreement with DMX did not reflect the fair market value of the music to the extent that price included both the cost of the music itself as well as the cost of actually delivering the music to retail customers. The Court concluded that the fair market value of the music was better expressed by the wholesale price at which Music Choice sold to cable and satellite operators. BACKGROUND 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 The history of this rate dispute is set out in comprehensive detail in Music Choice I. Familiarity with these decisions is presumed. Music Choice is a partnership between wholly owned subsidiaries of Adelphia Cable. BMI is one of the two major performing rights societies which license the public performing rights to most copyrighted musical works in this country. Is the other.2 BMI typically issues blanket licenses to broadcast any and all of the approximately 4.5 million musical works in its portfolio for a finite period of time.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="96"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/9236CC5DE216457088256C09005A60DC/$file/0016752.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
We hold that Procedure 770 is an exaggerated. Unreasonable response to prison officials' legitimate concerns about the safety of prison staff and thereby unconstitutionally restricts the public's First Amendment right to view executions from the moment the condemned is escorted into the execution chamber. It is helpful to understand the execution process. Approximately 25 minutes before the execution is scheduled to take place. Though his legs are free. The condemned is handcuffed and his wrists are shackled to his waist. The condemned is laid on a gurney. To which he is secured with six straps. Two of the four guards leave and two medical technicians enter to insert two intravenous lines (one is redundant. Once the intravenous lines are inserted. Representatives of the public and the press have been allowed to witness California's entire execution process from start to finish. Strap him into the chair and administer the lethal gas until he was declared dead. Witnesses were not permitted to watch Bonin as the guards brought him into the chamber.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="96"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200314326.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Or that was produced using materials that have been mailed. Definitions of § 2252A's terms are contained in 18 U.S.C. § 2256. The section was amended just days before Maxwell's trial. The amendments are of no moment in this case. § 2256. Data stored on computer disk or by electronic means which is capable of conversion into a visual image. Its case relied on establishing that the images were produced by materials that did. The first three grounds are insufficient to warrant reversal. The fourth ground is that the application of § 2252A(a)(5)(B) to the facts of his case amounts to an unconstitutional exercise of the Commerce Clause. (B) such visual depiction is. Or modified to appear that an identifiable minor is engaging in sexually explicit conduct. Or (D) such visual depiction is advertised. Or distributed in such a manner that conveys the impression that the material is or contains a visual depiction of a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct. (9)
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="95"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/200006/99-1198a.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
With him on the briefs were Jerold L. With her on the brief were Christopher J. The FCC took those actions after the licensees' sole owner and president was convicted of sexually abusing children. The case is no more difficult than this recitation of the facts suggests. Have an application pending for another Missouri station. Michael Rice is the sole share holder. Rice was arrested for criminal conduct involving sexual acts with a teenager. He was formally charged with three felony counts of sexual assault on an individual between fourteen and sixteen years of age. Two days after the charges were filed. The reports were filed pursuant to 47 C.F.R. s 165(a). Rice is being completely insulated and excluded from any involvement in the managerial. Rice was discharged from the hospital. Rice is no longer hospitalized. He continues to have no managerial or policy role in the affairs of the three broadcast corpora tions ... in which he has ownership interests and corpo rate positions. Rice was convicted of all twelve felony counts against him: four counts of forcible sodomy.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="95"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/98/03/952976P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The opinion of the court is reported at Community Publishers. The private plaintiffs have filed a motion to dismiss these appeals as moot. That motion is denied. An issue raised by NAT and Donrey is whether the District Court erred in awarding attorney fees and costs to the private plaintiffs. The award of fees and costs can be sustained only if the private parties are found to be prevailing parties. 63 2 1 Plaintiffs' theory of the case. Is that the acquisition of the Times by NAT likely would have anticompetitive effects in the local daily newspaper business. The facts of the case are described in detail in the District Court's lengthy opinion. Was required to show injury or
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="95"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/626A5E633B8887E388256E5C006D2DEC/$file/0255418.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Circuit Judge: Richard Ceballos filed this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 contending that he was subjected to adverse employ 3448 CEBALLOS v. Qualified immunity was not available to the individual defendants because the law was clearly established that Ceballos's speech addressed a matter of public concern and that his interest in the speech outweighed the public employer's interest in avoiding inefficiency and disruption. Is entitled to such immunity depends on whether he was performing a state or a county function when he took the alleged actions with respect to Ceballos. We hold that in most respects he was acting in the latter capacity. He is not entitled to Eleventh Amendment immunity. Neither is the County. In 1997 or 1998 he was assigned to the District Attorney's CEBALLOS v. GARCETTI 3449 Office's Pomona Branch and about a year later was promoted to calendar deputy. Told Ceballos that he believed that one of the arresting deputy sheriffs may have lied in a search warrant affidavit. Ceballos was supervising the deputy district attorney assigned to the case.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="94"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/199908/98-1305a.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
With him on the briefs were Richard E. Moline were on the briefs for appellant Freedom of Expression Foundation. With him on the brief were Frank W. Assistant Attorney General at the time the brief was filed. With him on the brief was Gigi B. Albert were on the brief for amicus curiae Safe Energy Communication Council. Petitioners1 maintain that the rules are
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="94"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/dc/opinions/98opinions/98-1305a.html">RADIO TV NEWS DIR V. FCC<BR></A><BR>
With him <p> on the briefs were <i>Richard E. Moline</i> were on the <p> briefs for appellant Freedom of Expression Foundation. Argued the cause for respondents. <p> With him on the brief were <i>Frank W. Assistant <p> Attorney General at the time the brief was filed. With him on the brief was <i>Gigi B. Albert</i> were on the brief <p> for amicus curiae Safe Energy Communication Council.<p> <p> Before: Edwards. Petitioners1 maintain that the rules are
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="93"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/011812.P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Circuit Judge: The question presented in this appeal is whether a Georgia based Internet Service Provider subjected itself to personal jurisdiction in Maryland by enabling a website owner to publish photographs on the Internet. ALS Scan thus alleges that all of the defendants have infringed and are infringing its copyrights within Maryland and elsewhere by selling. Digital provided affidavits demonstrating that Digital is a Georgia corporation with its only place of business in Atlanta. Digital asserts that it is an ISP which provided bandwidth service to Alternative Products as a customer but that it is not affiliated in any way with Alternative Products except through an arms length customer relationship. It did not have knowledge that they were posted on Alternative Products' website. ALS Scan asserts that copies of its copyrighted photographs have appeared on Alternative Products' two webBandwidth in this context has been explained by the following analogy:
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="92"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.fedcir.gov/opinions/04-1445.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Of counsel was Al Van Kampen. With him on the brief was Jared S. Of counsel on the brief were Stephen P. We hold that the district court was substantially correct in its construction of the term
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="92"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200306/02-1020a.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="91"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200705/05-1396a.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
With him on the briefs was Richard S. With him on the brief were Ronald E. With him on the brief were Richard G. LLC (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="91"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/10circuit/may96/94-8056.wpd.html">UNITED STATES V. CUSUMANO<BR></A><BR>
Detective Bohlig concluded that Defendants Cusumano and Porco were growing marijuana for sale in the basement of their rented residence. Defendants stated to the landlord that a grow light in the basement's furnace room was used to grow fresh vegetables. Power company reports indicated that the residence was consuming twice the amount of electricity as similar structures in the area. The electrician also reported that the use of power equipment to provide electricity to an alleged sound stage placed over the basement's indoor swimming pool was inconsistent with existing wiring. Defendants were operating a generator in the garage of the residence purportedly to provide supplemental electricity for musical equipment in the basement. Though no such equipment was ever observed. A thermal imager scan of the residence indicated that Defendants were emitting high levels of heat from the residence. Detective Bohlig concluded in his affidavit that Defendants Cusumano and Porco were growing marijuana in the basement's swimming pool.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="90"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//july2001/00-12390.man.html">DOW JONES & CO. V. KAYE (7/12/2001, NO. 00-12390)<BR></A><BR>
Circuit Judge:</SPAN></P> <P><SPAN STYLE=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="90"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/july2001/00-12390.man.html">DOW JONES & CO. V. KAYE (7/12/2001, NO. 00-12390)<BR></A><BR>
Circuit Judge:</SPAN></P> <P><SPAN STYLE=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="90"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/D4958BAAF34B2292882571B500580F96/$file/0410648.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Circuit Judge: We are called upon to decide whether. What evidence is sufficient to convict its owner of receiving and possessing child pornography. 2 Romm was convicted of knowingly receiving and knowingly possessing child pornography in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 2252A(a)(2). Romm claims the evidence of his crime should have been suppressed as the fruits of an unlawful border search. When he merely viewed child pornography without
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="89"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/064086p.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Price and Warren present two principal issues for review: (1) whether the activities they engaged in were protected by the Petition Clause. (2) whether their speech is protected after the Supreme Court's decision in Garcetti v. We will affirm the judgment of the District Court. The unit to which Price and Warren were assigned as instructors during the time period relevant to this case. Price and Warren were long term members of the DSP at 4 the time of the events giving rise to this case. Sergeant Christopher Foraker was the Section Chief of the FTU from August 1. At which point he was moved to another unit. Were specifically concerned with health and safety issues there. The bullet trap was malfunctioning. Officers and students at the range were suffering the physical manifestations of contamination. Warren explained that their objective was to limit their exposure to lead and other unsafe metals. Foraker were not permitted to speak to the press without the approval of superior officers. They were ordered to submit to a hearing examination to determine whether they were fit for duty.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="89"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/063098p.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Was indicted on January 20. Claiming they are unsupported and politically motivated. His trial was scheduled to begin in October 2006. We have stayed it pending disposition of three applications that are before us: (1) Wecht's challenge of Local Rule 83.1 of the U.S. Wecht was indicted on January 20. This feud was
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="88"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/apr2000/98-6222.man.html">GULF POWER CO. V. FED. COMMUNICATIONS COMM'N (4/11/2000, NO. 98-6222)<BR></A><BR>
If the power and telephone companies will not accept the rent the providers offer to pay. The FCC also ruled (in the <EM>Report and Order</EM> ) that the 1996 Act precluded utilities (power and telephone) from receiving rent for wires that were
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="88"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//apr2000/98-6222.man.html">GULF POWER CO. V. FED. COMMUNICATIONS COMM'N (4/11/2000, NO. 98-6222)<BR></A><BR>
If the power and telephone companies will not accept the rent the providers offer to pay. The FCC also ruled (in the <EM>Report and Order</EM> ) that the 1996 Act precluded utilities (power and telephone) from receiving rent for wires that were
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="88"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/200005/99-1183a.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
With him on the briefs were Howard A. Brenner and Katherine Connor Linton were on the brief of amici curiae Members of Congress. Lorence was on the brief of amici curiae Evangelical Association of Pastors & Layman. With him on the brief were Christopher J. I
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="88"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=94-1538.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
1996 is amended as follows: On page 42. Insert
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="88"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=01-2131.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Were on brief. Was on brief. Were on brief for appellees William May and City of Townsend.</SPAN></P> <BR WP=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="88"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/dc/opinions/01opinions/01-1153a.html">COSTA DE ORO TELEVISION V. FCC<BR></A><BR>
Were on brief. <span style=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="87"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/07/06/062368P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The facts are as follows. Captain Davison actively and publicly opposed the Plan and asserts that she repeatedly was denied promotion to the position of Arson Investigator in retaliation for her outspoken and public opposition. Kathy and [her son] were at a neighborhood meeting.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="87"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:8080/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcT1BOXDAzLTkyNjZfb3BuLnBkZg==/03-9266_opn.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Savin Corporation argues that the District Court erred in holding that (i) the FTDA requires a plaintiff to demonstrate evidence of actual dilution even where the court finds that the at issue marks are identical. (ii) the standard for dilution under New York General Business Law § 360 l is the same as the standard for dilution under the FTDA. (iii) there is no genuine issue of material fact regarding whether the defendants appellees' use of certain at issue marks creates a likelihood of confusion with the plaintiff appellant's marks. Which are essentially undisputed. Are derived primarily from the District Court's findings of fact. Was founded in 1959 and has its principal place of business in Stamford. Plaintiff is engaged in the business of marketing. Plaintiff's products are sold through seventeen company owned branches consisting of over sixty sales and service offices and over 250 trained dealers throughout the United States. Plaintiff's largest customers are in the government. Plaintiff's ownership of the
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="87"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/10circuit/july97/96-1409.wpd.html">UNITED STATES V. MCVEIGH<BR></A><BR>
Which motion was made available to the public only in redacted form. Which were made available to the public only in redacted form. At the time this action was commenced. Who is accused of assisting McVeigh in his preparation for the bombing. Is scheduled to go to trial following the conclusion of post trial proceedings in the McVeigh matter. Nichols heard a news report that McVeigh was a suspect in the bombing. Asked to speak with someone regarding why his name was being mentioned in connection with the bombing investigation. Nichols was arrested on a material witness warrant from the United States District Court in Oklahoma City. (3) whether there was a substantial probability that some recognized interest of higher value than public access to information will be prejudiced or affected adversely by the disclosure. (5) whether closure by the court was essential to protect that interest. The relevant documents are: (1) The redacted portions of Nichols'
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="86"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200402/03-5075a.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="86"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=02-2340.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
<SPAN STYLE=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="86"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/200206/01-1153a.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Were on brief. Feinberg and Scott Dailard were on brief for the intervenor. Statutory and Regulatory Background Concerned that local television broadcast stations were no longer able to compete with the growing cable industry. U.S.C. s 534(a).2 A
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="85"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200508/04-1031a.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
With him on the brief were Robert H. Crawford's principal contention is that he lacked notice that his proposals could be precluded by another applicant's earlier filed submission. Each channel allocated to a particular community is identified by a number between 221 and 300. This number is followed by the station's class. Possible classes are A. It also accepts counterproposals that are
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="85"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/052858p.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Daniel Voelker was sentenced to seventy one months in prison followed by a lifetime term of supervised release after he pled guilty to possessing child pornography in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2252(a)(2). We will vacate those conditions and remand for resentencing consistent with this opinion. Briefly exposed the buttocks of his three year old daughter over a webcam that was connected to his computer. He directed agents to computer discs where the files were stored. He insisted that statements he had made about sexual contact with minors or offering his daughter for sex were merely gratuitous statements in the nature of
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="85"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/op/02/02-1372.PDF">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Is unconstitutional under the First Amendment of the United States Constitution. Arguing the district court erred in granting summary judgment and that the peddling ordinance is unconstitutional. Finding that the ordinance 2 No. 02 1372 is not a proper time. Manner restriction and is an impermissible prior restraint on free speech. As is evident from the title. Weinberg is no stranger to selling his wares outside the United Center and its forerunner. Explaining that he was in violation of the City's peddling ordinance. Then Weinberg sought and obtained a temporary restraining order which permitted him to resume book sales outside the United Center and the parties agreed to have the case transferred to a magistrate judge. Is not a reasonable time. Is void for vagueness. Each of these is addressed in turn.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="85"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/199804/97-1030a.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
O'Rourke were on the joint briefs. Federal Communications Commission were on brief. Diercks were on brief for joint intervenors AK Media Group. Because the FCC's rationale for its ruling is unclear. I. USC is the licensee of noncommercial educational television station KTSC(TV). USC's transmission facili ties are located north of Pueblo at Baculite Mesa. USC was required to stop using Channel 53 when a full power station began operating on that channel. Because the Cheyenne Mountain site is
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="84"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/sept95/92-8777.man.html">MILLER V. FCC<BR></A><BR>
This document was created from RTF source by rtftohtml version 2.7.5 > <title>Miller v. A determination of the lowest unit charge under section 315(b) and that the FCC is the exclusive forum for adjudicating section 315(b) liability determinations. Regulates broadcast media rates as follows:<p> The charges made for the use of any broadcasting station by any person who is a legally qualified candidate for any public office in connection with his campaign for nomination for election. <p> <p> (1) during the forty five days preceding the date of a primary or primary runoff election and during the sixty days preceding the date of a general or special election in which such person is a candidate. Section 315(b)(1) is commonly known as the
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="84"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200403/03-3104a.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="84"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//sept95/92-8777.man.html">MILLER V. FCC<BR></A><BR>
This document was created from RTF source by rtftohtml version 2.7.5 > <title>Miller v. A determination of the lowest unit charge under section 315(b) and that the FCC is the exclusive forum for adjudicating section 315(b) liability determinations. Regulates broadcast media rates as follows:<p> The charges made for the use of any broadcasting station by any person who is a legally qualified candidate for any public office in connection with his campaign for nomination for election. <p> <p> (1) during the forty five days preceding the date of a primary or primary runoff election and during the sixty days preceding the date of a general or special election in which such person is a candidate. Section 315(b)(1) is commonly known as the
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="84"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/00/08/991855P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Allou Health argues that: (1) the district court erred in holding that parol evidence was admissible to explain the contract at issue. (2) evidence admitted was hearsay and should have been excluded. (3) the award of damages was excessive. (4) an exhibit not listed in the pre trial order was improperly admitted into evidence. Jurisdiction was proper in the district court based on 28 U.S.C. § 1332 (diversity jurisdiction). Jurisdiction is proper in this court based upon 28 U.S.C. § 1291. The notices of appeal were timely filed pursuant to Fed. Is a developer of websites where customers can purchase products over the Internet. Which site was named The Fragrance Counter. Allou Health had a website on America On Line for which it was paying twelve percent of revenue. In this letter Brown stated that ACTONet's proposal
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="84"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2001/03/00-2318.htm">00-2318 -- U.S. V. WHITE -- 03/27/2001<BR></A><BR>
Robert Emerson White was sentenced to six months in the custody of the Bureau of Prisons followed by a two year term of supervised release. Contending not one is reasonably related to protecting the public or achieving his rehabilitation. White selected the mode of delivery and was assured the seller was not involved in a sting operation. White was again discovered drinking alcohol. White to six months in custody followed by two years of supervised release with five special conditions.<a href=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="83"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca10.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=05-1376.wpd">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Freedom was recapitalized. Hoiles subsequently filed suit seeking a declaratory judgment that Alioto was not entitled to a contingent fee based on the selling price of the stock. The United States District Court for the District of Colorado determined Colorado law governed all issues in the case and that the Fee Agreement was unenforceable under Colorado law. We remand with instructions for the district court to determine whether the Fee Agreement is enforceable under California law. Freedom was a closely held media conglomerate owning various newspapers. The remaining shares were owned by other descendants of Hoiles' grandfather. Hoiles believed mismanagement of the company and family shareholder disputes were damaging the value of Freedom's stock. Were unwilling to pay what Hoiles considered a fair price and outside buyers were reluctant to purchase a minority interest in a family owned company. <hr> At Hoiles' direction. Alioto claims Hoiles wanted him to take any action that was necessary. It provided Alioto was to receive
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="83"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=93-1893.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Brady were on brief for Rhode Island Liquor Stores Association. Was on brief for State of Rhode Island. Lawson with whom Lawson & Weitzen was on brief for plaintiffs appellees. Was among the earliest to ratify the Twenty First that repealed it. The
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="83"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca10.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=06-4057.wpd">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
These matters are before the court on two separate petitions for rehearing. The petitions were filed separately and correspond to the two opinions issued in these appeals on April 17. The requests for panel rehearing are denied by the original panel which decided these cases. The en banc petitions were transmitted to all of the judges of the court who are in regular active service. A poll was requested. The decisions of the panel will stand. The en banc requests are denied. Judges Lucero and McConnell have filed dissents to the denial. They are attached and incorporated in this order. That response is also incorporated in this order. Because the panel's opinion will leave our circuit unnecessarily entangled in future review of time. It is important to distinguish between transitory and permanent speech. Not unlike most public parks in America in which permanent monuments have been placed. The government must have exercised some control over the form and content of the speech before the fact. 1141 43 (10th Cir. 2001) (holding sign was government speech where the city had
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="83"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="ftp://opinions.ca5.uscourts.gov/byDate/Jun2004/Jun17/98-20385-CV3.wpd.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
As to Petitioner Max Alexander Soffar's claims that (1) he did not have effective assistance of counsel in the guilt phase proceedings. (2) his right to counsel was violated by police interrogation regarding an extraneous offense after he had been charged with capital murder and had requested and received appointed counsel. When that interrogation was later used to obtain a death penalty at the penalty phase. This current opinion will be sometimes referred to herein as Soffar III. Soffar's conviction was based indispensably on the statements taken from him by police after three days of interrogation and without an attorney present. The single known eyewitness was neither contacted by defense counsel nor called to testify. Which could have been controverted by that uncalled eyewitness. There was no physical evidence. We address the State's argument that Soffar's claim of ineffective assistance of counsel was neither properly 2 exhausted in his state habeas petition nor properly raised in his federal habeas application.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="83"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=93-1893A.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Brady were on brief for Rhode Island Liquor Stores Association. Was on brief for State of Rhode Island. Lawson with whom Lawson & Weitzen was on brief for plaintiffs appellees. Was among the earliest to ratify the Twenty First that repealed it. The
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="83"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/1997/10/96-7074.htm">96-7074 -- U.S. V. LAMPLEY -- 10/20/1997<BR></A><BR>
John Dare Baird were convicted of conspiring to knowingly make and possess a destructive device and maliciously damage and destroy. Baird also were convicted of the use or carrying of a firearm during and in relation to the commission of a crime of violence. Lampley also was convicted of solicitation of a government informant to commit a crime of violence against the United States. Baird submit that their Sixth Amendment right to a fair trial by an impartial jury was unduly prejudiced by the influence of the April 19. The details of their claim are: The trial coincided with the one year anniversary of the Oklahoma City bombing. The corresponding presence of security forces was excessive and media publicity pervasive. A memorial wreath was placed on the courthouse door. A memorial sign was in the window of a Federal Protective Service vehicle parked in front of the courthouse. Statements relating to the Oklahoma City bombing were admitted into evidence. <p> <strong>A.</strong> There is no dispute that Defendants were tried during the general anniversary period of the Oklahoma City bombing.<a href=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="83"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/06/05/043049P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
He was hired as the Razorbacks' head The Honorable William R. The district court dismissed the Foundation and it is not a party on appeal. 22 1 men's basketball coach in 1985. The record is replete. Richardson was asked what he and Kentucky coach Tubby Smith discussed on the floor prior to tip off. Is that. We ain't going to have to worry about all that.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="83"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=03-1970.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
<SPAN STYLE=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="83"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="ftp://opinions.ca5.uscourts.gov/byDate/May2004/May19/98-20385-CV3.wpd.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
As to Petitioner Max Alexander Soffar's claims that (1) he did not have effective assistance of counsel in the guilt phase proceedings. (2) his right to counsel was violated by police interrogation regarding an extraneous offense after he had been charged with capital murder and had requested and received appointed counsel. When that interrogation was later used to obtain a death penalty at the penalty phase. This current opinion will be sometimes referred to herein as Soffar III. Soffar's conviction was based indispensably on the statements taken from him by police after three days of interrogation and without an attorney present. The single known eyewitness was neither contacted by defense counsel nor called to testify. Which could have been controverted by that uncalled eyewitness. There was no physical evidence. We address the State's argument that Soffar's claim of ineffective assistance of counsel was neither properly 2 exhausted in his state habeas petition nor properly raised in his federal habeas application.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="83"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/10circuit/oct97/96-7074.wpd.html">UNITED STATES V. LAMPLEY<BR></A><BR>
John Dare Baird were convicted of conspiring to knowingly make and possess a destructive device and maliciously damage and destroy. Baird also were convicted of the use or carrying of a firearm during and in relation to the commission of a crime of violence. Lampley also was convicted of solicitation of a government informant to commit a crime of violence against the United States. Defendants were tried together in district court and argued their appeals in this court on the same day. violation of 18 U.S.C. 2. Baird submit that their Sixth Amendment right to a fair trial by an impartial jury was unduly prejudiced by the influence of the April 19. The details of their claim are: The trial coincided with the one year anniversary of the Oklahoma City bombing. The corresponding presence of security forces was excessive and media publicity pervasive. A memorial wreath was placed on the courthouse door. A memorial sign was in the window of a Federal Protective Service vehicle parked in front of the courthouse.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="83"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200506/04-5301a.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
With him on the briefs was Joel Kurtzberg. With him on the briefs were Nathan E. With him on the briefs was Ethan Arenson. Leslie were on the brief for amici curiae Magazine Publishers of America. With him on the brief were Betsy A. Connolly were on the brief for amicus curiae Steven J. Because there was insufficient evidence to hold Appellant Jeff Gerth in contempt we reverse the District Court's order as to him. 3 I. Wen Ho Lee is a scientist who was employed by the Department of Energy (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="83"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/Aug1998/98a1932p.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The issue on appeal is whether the district court erred by concluding that Mark Madden. Is entitled to claim a journalist's privilege. We hold that he is not and will reverse. I. We will summarize only those facts necessary to give context to the issue. Are the most prominent professional wrestling promoters in the United States. 2 none of which are germane to this appeal. A nonparty witness who is employed by WCW. Which are replayed to callers on WCW's 900 number hotline. That his announcements are as much entertainment as journalism. The district court concluded that Madden was a
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="83"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/july96/94-6699.opa.html">INTERNATIONAL CAUCUS OF LABOR COMM. V. CITY OF MONTGOMERY<BR></A><BR>
This document was created from RTF source by rtftohtml version 2.7.5 > <title>International Caucus of Labor Comm. v. Were distributing literature from a card table placed on the sidewalk when police told them to leave or submit to arrest. The district court found that The International Caucus is an organization devoted to altering the contemporary political landscape. One of its preferred ways is to place tables in public areas in an effort to attract people to take its literature from these tables. The letter stated in relevant part:<p> Your actions do not violate the laws of this city unless you impede the orderly flow of traffic in the streets and at the street corners.<p> <p> Your organization will not be allowed to set up tables or booths on the sidewalks of this city. These tables or booths would create a partial blockage of pedestrian traffic and therefore will not be allowed on the sidewalks. Your organization may set up tables or booths on private property where you have the permission of the property owner.<p> <p> The City maintains that its policy is a complete ban of any tables on all sidewalks.<p> Plaintiffs sued the City of Montgomery.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="83"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/Jul1998/98a1911p.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The issue on appeal is whether the district court erred by concluding that Mark Madden. Is entitled to claim a journalist's privilege. We hold that he is not and will reverse. I. We will summarize only those facts necessary to give context to the issue. Are the most prominent professional wrestling promoters in the United States. None of which are germane to this appeal. A nonparty witness who is employed by WCW. Which are replayed to callers on WCW's 900 2 number hotline. That his announcements are as much entertainment as journalism. The district court concluded that Madden was a
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="83"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=01-1029.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
P.L.L.C.</U> were on brief for appellant.</FONT> <P><FONT FACE=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="83"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:8080/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcT1BOXDA1LTA5MzMtY3Zfb3BuLnBkZg==/05-0933-cv_opn.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Who was a member of this panel. Are issues not easily resolved by reference to existing state law. Because we agree with the district court that ITC lacks standing to pursue a false advertising claim against Although the term
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="83"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/C2C2BD81117E656D88256C6F005C6AA9/$file/0017299.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
We decide whether Flowers's claims are timely and. A few days later Flowers (doubtless realizing that honesty is the best policy after all) sold her story to the Star. Later news reports suggested that the tapes may have been selectively edited. The court held that most of Flowers's allegations are time barred. Holding that some of the statements are merely rhetorical hyperbole and others are opinions based on earlier news reports. There was nothing left to conspire about. CARVILLE 7 defamation in Nevada is two years. While the statute in other potentially relevant states is only one. Some of Flowers's claims are only timely under Nevada's longer limitations period. Before Flowers filed suit. [2] Because this is a diversity case. Many states have passed
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="83"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/datefile/datefile.htm">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
End page heading. > <div align=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="83"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/1998/10/96-4087.htm">96-4087 -- SNYDER V. MURRAY CITY CORP. -- 10/27/1998<BR></A><BR>
Circuit Judge. <p> <hr align=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="83"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//july96/94-6699.opa.html">INTERNATIONAL CAUCUS OF LABOR COMM. V. CITY OF MONTGOMERY<BR></A><BR>
This document was created from RTF source by rtftohtml version 2.7.5 > <title>International Caucus of Labor Comm. v. Were distributing literature from a card table placed on the sidewalk when police told them to leave or submit to arrest. The district court found that The International Caucus is an organization devoted to altering the contemporary political landscape. One of its preferred ways is to place tables in public areas in an effort to attract people to take its literature from these tables. The letter stated in relevant part:<p> Your actions do not violate the laws of this city unless you impede the orderly flow of traffic in the streets and at the street corners.<p> <p> Your organization will not be allowed to set up tables or booths on the sidewalks of this city. These tables or booths would create a partial blockage of pedestrian traffic and therefore will not be allowed on the sidewalks. Your organization may set up tables or booths on private property where you have the permission of the property owner.<p> <p> The City maintains that its policy is a complete ban of any tables on all sidewalks.<p> Plaintiffs sued the City of Montgomery.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="83"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/199804/97-1116a.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Schaerr were on the briefs. Were on the brief. Honig was on the brief for intervenors Missouri State Conference of Branches of the NAACP. Was on the brief for the United States as amicus curiae. Rosman was on the brief for amici curiae Center for Individual Rights and National Religious Broad casters. May were on the brief for amicus curiae American Center for Law and Justice. Both stations are housed on the campus of the Church's Concordia Semi nary and.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="83"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/dc/opinions/97opinions/97-1116a.html">LUTHERAN CHCH MO V. FCC<BR></A><BR>
Schaerr</i> were on the briefs.<p> <p> <p> <i>Daniel M. Were on the brief. <i><p> Robert B. Honig</i> was on the brief for intervenors Missouri <p> State Conference of Branches of the NAACP. Was on the brief for the United States as <i><p> amicus curiae.</i><p> <p> <i>Michael E. Rosman</i> was on the brief for <i>amici curiae</i> <p> Center for Individual Rights and National Religious Broad <p> casters. <i>Michael P. May </i><p> were on the brief for <i>amicus curiae</i> American Center for <p> Law and Justice.<p> <p> Before: Silberman. Both stations <p> <p> <p> are housed on the campus of the Church's Concordia Semi <p> nary and.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="82"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/999D1D5B0D734B6088256D6D0078CB88/$file/0115899.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The year was 1994. Domain names were free for the asking. Was doing time for impersonating a bankruptcy lawyer. That was only a minor impediment for a man of Cohen's boundless resource and bounded integrity. Why was this unusual letter being sent via Cohen rather than to Network Solutions directly? It explained: Because we do not have a direct connection to the internet. We have no objections to your use of the domain name sex.com and this letter shall serve as our authorization to the internet registration to transfer sex.com to your corporation.2 Despite the letter's transparent claim that a company called
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="82"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200307/02-1093a.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="82"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/fed/opinions/03opinions/03-1526.html">THE NAUTILUS GROUP V. ICON HEALTH AND FITNESS, INC.<BR></A><BR>
Argued for plaintiff appellee.<span style='mso spacerun:yes'> </span>With him on the brief was <u>Mark S. Argued for defendant appellant.<span style='mso spacerun:yes'> </span>On the brief were <u>Larry R. Todd</u>.<span style='mso spacerun:yes'> </span>Of counsel were <u>Robyn L. Trademark to sell its exercise equipment.<span style='mso spacerun:yes'> </span>Nautilus is the holder of the ". Tab stops:.5in'>Nautilus and ICON are direct competitors in the market for home exercise equipment.<span style='mso spacerun:yes'> </span>Both produce resistance training systems that use bendable rods.<span style='mso spacerun:yes'> </span>In Nautilus's product. The rods are arranged vertically. Outward.<span style='mso spacerun:yes'> </span>The rods are structured to resist this outward movement. 000 machines have been sold. The bendable rods are arranged horizontally so that they bend downward. Is replaced by a circular crosshairs.<span style='mso spacerun:yes'> </span>Beneath the mark. Line height:200%'>While its appeal of the patent infringement issue was pending.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="82"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=01-1197.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Kleger</U> was on brief for appellant.</FONT></P> <P><FONT FACE=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="82"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.fedcir.gov/opinions/04-1447.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
With her on the brief were John M. The Board held the mark was either generic or merely descriptive and without secondary meaning. This court vacates the Board's determination that the mark is generic. The examining attorney initially denied registration on the ground that the proposed mark was merely descriptive. This time finding that the mark was generic for the specified goods and services without any acquired distinctiveness under 15 U.S.C. § 1052(f). The Board affirmed the PTO's rejection on the ground that STEELBUILDING.COM is generic for
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="82"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/031911.P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
For direct infringement under §§ 501 and 106 of the Copyright Act because CoStar's copyrighted photographs were posted by LoopNet's subscribers on LoopNet's website. CoStar contended that the photographs were copied into LoopNet's computer system and that LoopNet therefore was a copier strictly liable for infringement of CoStar's rights under § 106. Regardless of whether LoopNet's role was passive when the photographs were copied into its system. Is simply the owner and manager of a system used by others who are violating CoStar's copyrights and is not an actual duplicator itself. It is not directly liable for copyright infringement. I CoStar is a national provider of commercial real estate information. It claims to have collected the most comprehensive database of 4 COSTAR GROUP v. LoopNet is an Internet service provider (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="82"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/00/02/991168P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Jurisdiction Jurisdiction in the district court was proper based upon 28 U.S.C. § 1343. Jurisdiction in the court of appeals was proper based upon 28 U.S.C. § 1291. The notice of appeal was timely filed pursuant to Fed. Background KWMU is a not for profit public broadcast radio station located on the campus of the University of Missouri at St. KWMU is owned and operated by The Curators of the University of Missouri. Is responsible for overseeing KWMU's operation. Contributors of such funds are referred to as
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="81"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.fedcir.gov/opinions/07-1064.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="81"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/dc/opinions/9_opinions/92-1541a.html">RED ROCK BCAST INC V. FCC<BR></A><BR>
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="81"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/5814F4959DB08678882571A80075BE54/$file/0415577.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
I Pebble Beach is a well known golf course and resort located in Monterey County. Caddy's business operation is located on a cliff overlooking the pebbly beaches of England's south shore. The name of Caddy's operation is
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="81"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/97/07/963137P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Is board certified in anatomical pathology. She is board eligible. She was the coroner of Otter Tail County. Was also employed by Orandi Medical. Defendants CBS and WCCO2 are engaged in the business of television broadcasting. Was found dead in her car in her garage. Although her demise was deemed a suicide by carbon monoxide poisoning. Which was critical of both the investigation and many of the officials involved. It is this report that forms the basis for this action. Her complaint alleged that three statements in the report were defamatory. CBS is organized under the laws of the State of New York and has its principal place of business there. WCCO is a wholly owned and operated division of CBS. It is not incorporated in any state and is not a legal entity separate from its existence as a CBS station. 2 2 Statement One: So many questions. Who was in good spirits. Why was she wearing only one shoe? Why was the death certificate signed and marked
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="81"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/98/08/972618P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Opening briefs have been filed by four petitioners or groups of petitioners: (1) BellSouth Corp. We also have received briefs from numerous intervenors. Petitioners contend that various specific actions taken by the FCC in the Order that directly affect the application and calculation of access charges are in violation of the 1996 Act. That other decisions made the by FCC in the Order are arbitrary and capricious. The IXCs argue generally that the Order does not make the transition to competitive access rates quickly enough and is too cautious in its concern for universal service. Argue that the FCC was insufficiently cautious with respect to protecting universal service and left them exposed to inefficient competitive entry in the short term. The FCC counters that the challenged provisions of the Order are the result of a reasonable exercise of its authority to regulate rates for interstate services under the Telecommunications Act of 1996. Are not arbitrary and capricious. We review agency action under the Administrative Procedure Act to determine whether it is
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="80"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/Jun2000/993545.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Is a student run newspaper at the University of Pittsburgh. Are subject to prosecution under Act 199. Therefore was not a proper party to bring this challenge.1 The Pitt News appeals. Arguing that its own First Amendment rights have been infringed by Act 199. Neither of whom are parties to this litigation. We hold that The Pitt News does have standing to argue that Act 199 infringes upon its own First Amendment rights. We will therefore proceed to the merits of the preliminary injunction only on the question of whether the economic effect felt by The Pitt News amounts to a violation of its own First Amendment rights. Will affirm. We have jurisdiction over this appeal pursuant to 28 U.S.C. FACTS and PROCEEDINGS The Pitt News is a student run newspaper. P. 30. 3 Students have full editorial control over the content of the newspaper. It is entirely supported by advertising revenue. It is distributed free of charge in racks at 75 locations around the school campus. It is read by University of Pittsburgh students and faculty.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="80"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=03-2164.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Were on brief. Massachusetts (the Leeds VAMC) was convicted of murdering four patients and attempting to murder three others between August 1995 and February 1996 by injecting them with epinephrine. Some of the estates of her alleged victims have since sued the United States for wrongful death under the Federal Torts Claims Act (FTCA). Mass. 2002).</P> <P> The cases have raised the issue. Or in the exercise of reasonable diligence should have discovered. 1996 was not timely. 344 F.3d at 67.</P> <P> The instant case was brought by the estate of another patient. The theory of the case is that the nurse. The administrative claim was filed on November 10. We conclude that the administrative claim was timely because it accrued on or after November 10. 1998. <SPAN STYLE=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="79"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/021137.P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Carefirst asks that we vacate the dismissal on the ground that Carefirst has made the requisite prima facie showing that CPC is subject to personal jurisdiction in Maryland. Is one of the nation's largest healthcare insurance companies. It is a non profit BlueCross BlueShield licensee. BlueCross BlueShield is an association of independent health plans. Have been chartered to operate in geographically distinct terri CAREFIRST OF MARYLAND v. Among the services covered by Carefirst's trademark and service mark in the CAREFIRST name are
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="78"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/fed/opinions/98opinions/98-1160.html">PMC V. ITC<BR></A><BR>
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="78"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/op/01/01-4155.PDF">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The Supreme Court held that high school administrators have broad powers to censor school sponsored newspapers if their actions are supported by valid educational purposes. We are asked to consider whether the principles of Hazelwood apply to public college and university students. Baron1 are (or. Were) students at Governors State University. They were appointed by the school's
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="77"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/05/10/043737P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Was sentenced to a term of 30 months' imprisonment. A range that is now advisory under the decision in United States v. Was a mitigating circumstance that the Sentencing Commission did not adequately take into consideration when it formulated the guidelines. He asserted that his prescription for the drug was tripled before the commission of his offense. The district court ruled that it was not permitted to consider a departure based on Mark's use of medication. Are both unintentional. Involuntary intoxication is therefore still available as a basis for departure from the guidelines in an appropriate case. We hold that the district court properly concluded that Mark's proposed departure was forbidden. Or (B) control behavior that the defendant knows is wrongful.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="77"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200310/02-1312a.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="76"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/04/07/033615P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Defendant Wesley Thorn was charged with one count of possession of child pornography in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 2252(a)(4)(B) and 2252(b) (2000). United States Magistrate Judge for the Western District of Missouri. 1 entered a conditional plea of guilty to the charge.2 He was sentenced to twenty seven months of imprisonment with three years of supervised release. The child pornography at issue was discovered on computer media found in Thorn's DCSE office in Joplin. Began investigating purported workplace misconduct after she received complaints that Thorn was inaccessible and had copied and distributed non work related e mail messages throughout the office. Thorn called in sick and was informed of the decision to place him on leave. Was illegally obtained. 2 2 informed Thorn that he could not remove anything from his office. Thorn agreed to this arrangement and gave instructions as to where the documents were located in the desk. DCSE is an agency within the Missouri Department of Social Services (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="76"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/May2000/982138.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Principally alleging that they terminated him from his position as Executive Administrator of the First Judicial District of Pennsylvania in violation of his constitutional rights and that court personnel unlawfully invaded his privacy when they publicly disclosed documents from domestic proceedings in which he was involved. We will affirm. A committee chaired by Justices James McDermott and Stephen Zappala of the Supreme Court conducted a search to select an Executive Administrator who would have the responsibility of
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="76"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200305/02-1039a.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="76"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/972316.U.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Having determined that Baumback was both a
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="76"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/200106/00-1253a.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
On the briefs were David E. With him on the brief were Christopher J. Stevenson were on the brief for intervenor Western New York Public Broadcasting Association. Identifying such channels with an asterisk in what is now called the Table of Allotments. Which was reserved for noncommercial educational use. Which was unreserved. Which it claimed was
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="76"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200401/02-1297a.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="76"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/Jan1997/97a1505p.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Which we will refer to as the voting room. When the doors were open. Because the tenor of the lyrics is so important to the resolution of the case. We recite the words of the songs: First song: Throughout North America you see us on the job from Atlanta to Calgary Vancouver to Cape Cod You can't tell us by our color you can't tell us by our hat we're the backbone of the country we take pride in being that We're brothers and we're sisters working hard for what is fair you can always tell a Teamster by that certain pride he wears Meeting all the challenges united we stand tall Proud to be a Teamster that's why we'll never fall We are the North Americans from sea to shining sea we backed our country in the fight we earned the right to be When FDR put out the call we kept him rolling through it all we are the workers who stand united we're Teamsters one and all We're carving out a better life for our loved ones old and young we're giving them the melody the song that's not been sung In a moment of reflection I close my eyes and see the dreams our fathers had for us are now reality Second song: Let's hail the Teamsters Union and sing of it with pride Remember Teamster members.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="76"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=96-1623.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Individually and as They Are Members of the Lexington School Committee. Smith were on brief for appellant. LLP were on brief for appellees. The advertisement promoted sexual abstinence and was proffered by a parent. Superintendent and school officials was terminated on defendants' motion for summary judgment. Holding that summary judgment should be entered for Yeo on his claims that there was state action. That each student publication was a public forum. That the decisions not to publish were impermissible view point discrimination. 1997 WL 292173 (1st Cir. The Yearbook was operated entirely by a staff of about sixty students. Staffing decisions were made by students. This staff was headed by two co editors in chief. Yankee Press Education Network. 4 was the Yearbook faculty advisor. Mechem was paid a stipend of less than $2. The Yearbook is financially independent from the school and is funded entirely through the sale of the books to students and advertising. This advertisement section was largely comprised of congratulatory or commemorative ads purchased by students and their families.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="76"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/dc/opinions/00opinions/00-1253a.html">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Sher argued the cause for petitioner.<span style=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="75"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/991175.P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
By the time this action was commenced. The exterior appearances of AHM's facilities are somewhat similar. Each is a rectangular building with a simulated tower. The roofs reflect different architectural styles and are constructed of dissimilar materials. Booth seating is located generally on one side of the island or peninsula. Stool seating is located on the other. Numerous television monitors and video games are present. As are pool tables. They are not identical. The menus are extensive. More than 20 types of beer are served on tap. Marketing data indicate that customers dining with their families are AHM's most frequent guests. Inc. was preparing to open a facility in Raleigh named the
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="75"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:8080/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcU1VNXDA1LTI5MjRfc28ucGRm/05-2924_so.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="75"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/043404p.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
At issue is whether plaintiff properly objected to the court's jury charge under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 51. 2 and whether plaintiff was entitled to an instruction on presumed damages and defamation per se. We will affirm. Is a small pharmacy in Philadelphia specializing in fertility medications. Franklin Prescriptions was not mentioned in the text. The insert was placed next to a side bar labeled
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="75"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca10.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=05-1206.wpd">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Challenging the court's instructions (1) that the jury could not award damages to Klesch under the last of several successive written agreements signed (1) This order and judgment is not binding precedent except under the doctrines of law of the case. (3) that Liberty Media would be liable for damages only if it was a but for cause of those damages. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. 1291 and affirm. This possibility appears to have sparked Liberty's interest in the deal. The letter stated that there was still no definitive agreement between the parties. The acquisition was still premised on the condition that all its aspects
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="75"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/60CD1611D2C6D243882571C40000B85A/$file/0530177.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Was on the briefs. Was on the brief. Is located in Bozeman. One of Softich's duties at Frontline was to monitor employee use of the workplace computers including their Internet access. The offending sites were accessed from a computer in the office of Appellant Jeffrey Brian Ziegler. Softich also informed Kennedy that the IT department had already placed a monitor on Ziegler's computer to record its Internet traffic by copying its cache files.3 A firewall is a piece of
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="74"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/981653.U.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Inc. (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="74"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/07a0178a-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Petitioner Robert Carl Foley was convicted of murder in Kentucky and sentenced to death. Were gathered at the Foley home when Foley returned from a car auction with his friend Danny Joe Bryant. Who was intoxicated and belligerent. You caused me to have to kill my partner.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="74"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/Aug2001/004313.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The effect on the record of the District Court's addition to it after a notice of appeal is filed. Because we hold that we have jurisdiction over an appealable collateral oral order. That it was error to issue the gag order. It will be reversed. The order was to last until the Court received the motion and decided it. The article stated that the device
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="74"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca10.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=06-7001.wpd">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Kyle Brinlee was a soldier in the Oklahoma National Guard who was killed in action while serving in Iraq on May 11. He was the first member of the Oklahoma National Guard to be killed in action since the Korean war. Brinlee's death and funeral were the subject of intense media coverage. Robert Showler is Sgt. (1) and Johnny Davidson is his maternal (1) This order and judgment is not binding precedent. Sitting by designation. (1) Brinlee was adopted by Robert Brinlee. At which time Showler's parental rights were terminated. <hr> grandfather and the personal representative of his estate. Stephens that although the media was allowed to attend the funeral. Peter Turnley is an international photojournalist who was working on assignment for Harper's. Turnley is a Contributing Editor engaged on a contract basis to produce photo essays. Turnley was working on a photo essay for Harper's concerning those grieving over deaths caused by the war in Iraq. The funeral was held at the Pryor High School gymnasium. Brinlee's casket was moved to the back of the auditorium.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="74"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/07a0110p-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Petitioner Robert Carl Foley was convicted of murder in Kentucky and sentenced to death. Were gathered at the Foley home when Foley returned from a car auction with his friend Danny Joe Bryant. Who was intoxicated and belligerent. You caused me to have to kill my partner.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="74"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//aug2001/00-10872.man.html">PLANETARY MOTION, INC. V. TECHPLOSION, INC. (8/16/2001, NO. 00-10872)<BR></A><BR>
Both of which accompanied the release.</SPAN></P> <P><SPAN STYLE=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="74"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/aug2001/00-10872.man.html">PLANETARY MOTION, INC. V. TECHPLOSION, INC. (8/16/2001, NO. 00-10872)<BR></A><BR>
Both of which accompanied the release.</SPAN></P> <P><SPAN STYLE=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="74"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/041375.P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Was convicted. The underlying case from which this appeal comes to us is Washington's VIRGINIA DEP'T OF STATE POLICE v. The merits of that case are not now before us. We are presented with a challenge by the Virginia Department of State Police (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="74"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/97/04/962761P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Astraea made numerous phone calls to Northwest's offices in Minnesota during this refurbishment contract was executed by the parties in Minnesota. contract was amended by a letter agreement in March 1994. Under which Astraea was to provide routine maintenance for some Northwest aircraft. United States District Judge for the District of Minnesota. 2 2 After the contracts were executed. There were delays in completing the aircraft. Including defective parts and a leaky fuel line and undetected tail crack on one of the aircraft. statements were included in an article in the Minneapolis newspaper. Copies of the article were faxed to Northwest employees in Texas. A suit is commenced when it is filed. The counterclaims filed in this action are basically identical to the claims asserted by Astraea in its Texas complaint. 3 3 breached the contracts by delivering the planes late and not performing to specifications. The parties Astraea to the breach of contract claims and moved for summary judgment on the counterclaims. settled the remaining claims which were dismissed with prejudice. counterclaims.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="74"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca10.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=04-4312.wpd">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
I. BACKGROUND World Wide is an association of residential treatment programs for troubled and at risk teenagers. Scheff was one such parent. Scheff disparaged were schools affiliated with World Wide. Berryman also posted messages that were critical of World Wide schools. His career is unrelated to helping troubled teenagers and their families. He is a self described
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="73"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/5978605BF5E489A588256D95005CB8DB/$file/0215035.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Bean's contacts with California as a result of its sales and other activities in California are
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="73"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/02/08/003210P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
K tel common stock was publicly traded on the NASDAQ National Market System (NMS). Thereby representing K tel was $226. The remaining documents filed with both courts reflect the name is spelled Kieves. This court will reference him as Kieves. 3 3 On October 19. K tel was not actually delisted as a result of the October 19. Almost 2.7 million shares of K tel common stock were sold by four individual defendants between May 8. There were only two other transactions by the individual defendants: on November 13. 000 shares which are at the end of or outside the class period) for approximately $532. The scheme was characterized by two circumstances. The Class asserts K tel knew in March 1998 of a $1.498 million loss due to the poor performance of a subsidiary and K tel was required by GAAP to write off the assets of the subsidiary in its March 10 Q filing. The Class alleged such overstating of assets in the March 10 Q and the later June 10 K is a violation of GAAP and is evidence of fraud and scienter because K tel's inclusion of the overstated assets concealed its inability to comply with the minimum necessary tangible net asset requirement for continued listing on the NMS.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="72"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/200007/98-1106a.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
With him on the briefs were Gene A. With him on the briefs were John R. With him on the brief were Christopher J. Blake was on the brief for intervenor Associa tion for Maximum Service Television. Circuit Judge: Petitioners and intervenors1 seek review of the Federal Communications Commission's final 1 Petitioners in these consolidated cases are Community Televi sion. Intervenors in support of petitioners are Paxson Communica tions Corporation. Which voluntarily withdrew its petition for review after filing its opening rules establishing the procedures and timetable under which television broadcasting will migrate from the now prevalent analog technology to digital technology. Have received an additional channel to commence digital broadcasting while continuing analog broad casts during the transition. Analog transmissions will cease. Broadcasters will retain their new digital channels and give back to the FCC their analog channels. Essentially all televi sion broadcasting in the United States will be exclusively by digital technology as of December 31.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="72"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/op/01/01-4340.PDF">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Todd Scott was sentenced to 24 months' imprisonment. Three years' supervised release is to follow the imprisonment. The rationale for this condition is that a search of the computer in Scott's 2 No. 01 4340 office turned up a few images of child pornography. Scott was not convicted of that offense. He contends that he should have received some notice that this condition was an option. He adds that the condition is (in his view) too broad with or without notice. These arguments are related: Notice is helpful only if the defendant could have offered something pertinent at sentencing. Which depends on whether the sweeping no Internet condition could have been narrowed. There were other possibilities. The district judge might have prohibited Scott from accessing newsgroups. Or the judge might have required Scott to install filtering software that would block access to sexually oriented sites. To permit the probation officer unannounced access to verify that the filtering software was functional. Filtering software is imperfect and may block access to some sites that lack the attributes sought to be put off limits (that's a premise of American Library Ass'n v.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="72"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.fedcir.gov/opinions/03-1615.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
With him on the brief were John B. With him on the brief were R. Of counsel were David W. An
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="72"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200306/02-5254a.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="72"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/Aug1997/97a1660p.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
A public school teacher asserts that he was punished because of the principal's belief that he had called the press about a matter of public interest at the school. We will affirm the grant of summary judgment in favor of the principal. Is an English teacher at Truman High School in Bristol Township. Who at that time was en route to the school. Plaintiff denied that he had called him or was even acquainted with him. Was unable to identify the caller.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="72"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/Aug1997/97a1660a.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
A public school teacher asserts that he was punished because of the principal's belief that he had called the press about a matter of public interest at the school. We will affirm the grant of summary judgment in favor of the principal. Is an English teacher at Truman High School in Bristol Township. Who at that time was en route to the school. Plaintiff denied that he had called him or was even acquainted with him. Was unable to identify the caller. The complaint in the district court alleged that the removal from extracurricular positions was a retaliatory action by defendant pursuant to his belief that plaintiff had exercised his First Amendment rights. You did not call the Courier Times? 3 Answer: That is correct. * * * * * * * * * * Question: Have you at any time. Answer: No. * * * * * * * * * * Question: Have [your fellow teachers] .. . in the last five years. The district court concluded that
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="72"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/dc/opinions/94opinions/94-1439a.html">PRESS BCAST CO V. FCC<BR></A><BR>
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="71"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/021326.P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Because their official positions were an intimidating asset in the execution of their plan. Because this sort of quasi private conspiracy by public officials was precisely the target of § 1983. I. The facts of this case are largely undisputed. Mary's Today is a weekly newspaper owned by Kenneth Rossignol and primarily serving St. Nor was this just
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="71"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/001918.P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Bush
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="71"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/dc/opinions/94opinions/94-1275a.html">CORP TELECOM SVC V. FCC<BR></A><BR>
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="71"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200410852.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Yuknavich was discovered printing out pictures of child pornography at work and using his work computer to access pornographic images involving children. He was also subject to a list of special conditions for child abusers/sex offenders. Defendant will continue in treatment/counseling for the 2 duration of his/her probation unless officially discharged by the probation supervisor or by the court. 7. Defendant is prohibited from working. Defendant is to be supervised the entire period of his/her probation for the express purpose of protecting children. .... 15. Sexually explicit or stimulating material which is performed. Yuknavich's primary probation officer was Marsha Goldstein.2 Goldstein was often assisted by Don Spencer. Yuknavich was indicted in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia on five counts of receiving child pornography. The only witnesses to testify at the hearing were Goldstein and Spencer. Yuknavich put a bid on a house and Goldstein reminded him that he was not to live near a school or a day care center.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="71"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200115788.opn.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
I'm not sure if he is abusing his own child or a child he kidnaped. He is from Montgomery. As you see he is torturing the kid. She is 5 6 y.o. His face is seen clearly on some of the pictures. Home address and I can see when he is online. Can I send all the pics and info I have to these emails? He is a doctor or a paramedic. 2 The anonymous source attached to this e mail an electronic image file containing a picture of a white male sexually abusing a young white female who appeared to be approximately four to six years of age. The source responded that he was from Turkey and could not afford an overseas phone call. Captain Murphy then sent an e mail stating:
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="71"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/00a0069p-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
None of which are present here. 1222 (7th Cir.) (noting that a denial of a motion to dismiss based on qualified immunity is considered a final. Appealable order if there are no material facts in dispute. Because part of the harm sought to be averted by the doctrine of immunity is the necessity of standing trial). The denial is also not an immediately appealable interlocutory order within the meaning of 28 U.S.C. § 1292(a)(1). Because the issue of whether Maquina Musical's motion for a preliminary injunction should have been granted is not
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="71"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//jan2003/01-15788.opn.html">UNITED STATES V. STEIGER (1/14/2003, NO. 01-15788)<BR></A><BR>
I'm not sure if he is abusing his own child or a child he kidnaped. He is from Montgomery. As you see he is torturing the kid. She is 5 6 y.o. His face is seen clearly on some of the pictures. Home address and I can see when he is online. Can I send all the pics and info I have to these emails?</SPAN></P> <P><SPAN STYLE=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="71"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/jan2003/01-15788.opn.html">UNITED STATES V. STEIGER (1/14/2003, NO. 01-15788)<BR></A><BR>
I'm not sure if he is abusing his own child or a child he kidnaped. He is from Montgomery. As you see he is torturing the kid. She is 5 6 y.o. His face is seen clearly on some of the pictures. Home address and I can see when he is online. Can I send all the pics and info I have to these emails?</SPAN></P> <P><SPAN STYLE=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="71"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/992138.P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="70"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2003/03/00-6366.htm">00-6366 -- HUSSAIN V. PALMER COMMUNICATIONS INCORPORATED -- 03/26/2003<BR></A><BR>
The plaintiff contends that he was improperly precluded from conducting additional discovery and that the defendants were not entitled to dismissal of his case on summary judgment. He was accused. The name of the man was never revealed by KFOR. The face of the man was digitally concealed in all of the news reports. The reports generally related information gathered by KFOR's reporters tending to connect the unidentified man to the bombing. <p> The plaintiff was unquestionably the unidentified man discussed in KFOR's news reports. It was determined that no John Doe #2 existed. <p> Hussain originally filed suit in state court in August of 1995. Some discovery for the state court suit was conducted by both sides. The suit was pending in state court for twenty months and. The court may refuse the application for judgment or may order a continuance to permit affidavits to be obtained or depositions to be taken or discovery to be had or may make such other order as is just.<strong></strong> <p> A party seeking time to conduct additional discovery under Rule 56(f) must provide an affidavit identifying what facts are not available and what steps the party has taken to obtain those facts. <u>See</u> <u>Comm. for the First Amendment v.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="70"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/1998/07/97-2064.htm">A. BACKUP DOCUMENTATION, MOTIONS, ORDERS, AND HEARING TRANSCRIPTS97-2064 -- U.S. V. GONZALES -- 07/28/1998<BR></A><BR>
If there is a right of access. <a href=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="70"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2000/08/99-4082.htm">99-4082 -- FEMEDEER V. HAUN -- 08/28/2000<BR></A><BR>
Apparently wishing to prevent widespread disclosure of his status as a sex offender. <p> Proceeding under a pseudonym in federal court is. We have recognized that there may be exceptional circumstances warranting some form of anonymity in judicial proceedings. As the Eleventh Circuit has explained: <p> Lawsuits are public events. The risk that a plaintiff may suffer some embarrassment is not enough. <p> <u>Doe v. We have held that it is proper to weigh the public interest in determining whether some form of anonymity is warranted. . It is difficult to apply legal principles of res judicata and collateral estoppel. The disclosure of Appellee's identity in the caption of this lawsuit is not coterminous to the harm he is seeking to avoid by filing this claim. The posting of his identity and other personal information on the Internet is likely to be more extensive than is the exposure resulting from his name on the caption of this lawsuit. Those using the courts must be prepared to accept the public scrutiny that is an inherent part of public trials. <p> Within twenty days.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="70"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2001/07/99-1375.htm">99-1375 -- SMITH V. PLATI -- 07/30/2001<BR></A><BR>
Hold that Smith's final allegation is moot.<a href=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="70"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200511052.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The licensee must obtain two separate FCC Susquehanna also contends the district court should have granted it summary judgment under the equitable doctrine of judicial estoppel. In the event the [FCC] grants a Construction Permit (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="70"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca10.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=04-4022.wpd">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
He was indicted and convicted of securities fraud under Section 17(b) of the Securities Act of 1933. For failing to inform readers of The Next SuperStock newsletter that he was selling his shares in the companies he had been recommending they buy. He was convicted under Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. (2) Section 17(b) is unconstitutionally vague. (3) his convictions were against the weight of the evidence presented at trial. Wenger and the SEC entered into a consent decree that stipulated he would disclose the full value of any consideration he was receiving from any issuer about which Penny Stock News was giving advice. According to which Wenger would first state on the air that he was a paid consultant to some of the companies mentioned. The letter then stated that
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="70"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=00-1641.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Were on brief for appellant.</FONT> <P><FONT FACE=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="70"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200411/03-1295a.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="70"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/00a0193p-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Ernestine Carter Hughes contends that the defendants unlawfully subjected her to dangerous medical tests in 1945 when she was a child. The district court concluded that Hughes's 1998 action was barred by the statute of limitations. Vanderbilt University conducted a three month study to further understand how iron is absorbed in the human body. Which was funded by the Nutrition Foundation. Was one of the principal researchers. Most of whom were between the ages of seven and ten. Were given lemonade that had been laced with radioactive iron. She was eight years old and a student at the Caldwell elementary school. Was one of Darby's subjects.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="69"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/200001/99-1018a.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
On the brief were Christopher J. Stephen Diaz Gavin and Janet Fitzpatrick were on the brief for intervenor. We also hold that Damsky is not entitled to an auction because the Commission adequately explained why the statutory settlement provisions and Com mission policy permitted the negotiated outcome obtained here. That it was financially qualified to cover certain construction and operating costs. C. Background on Auction Provisions While exceptions to the ALJ's decision were pending. That the
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="69"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2000/05/99-1211.htm">99-1211 -- FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION V. COLORADO REPUBLICAN FEDERAL CAMPAIGN COMMITTEE -- 05/05/2000<BR></A><BR>
Are subject to FECA's contribution limits. <u>Buckley</u>. The Act sets the following contribution limits: A
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="69"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/052376p.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Though PNI originally was not a party in this case. We will reverse the district court's order to the extent that it denied that prong of PNI's motion. The facts germane to this appeal are not complex. At a time when PNI was not yet a party in this case. The district court granted the motion and entered the following order: 1) Defendants' motion for a protective order is GRANTED. 2) All information. Persons employed in such attorneys' offices or by such attorneys who are assisting counsel in this action. A notice shall be served on the other party fully identifying the person to whom disclosure is to be made. If that objection is not resolved by agreement. As we have indicated. JURISDICTION While we recognize that orders relating to discovery generally are not final for purposes of appellate jurisdiction. We have jurisdiction here under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 pursuant to the collateral order doctrine because: (1) the district court's order
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="69"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/9C38EFDD2E8091A488256B82000726CD/$file/0016616.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The purpose of the operation was to kill American defectors. Women and children were killed during the operation. Van Buskirk also complains that he was defamed by a subsequent retraction of the reports on CNN that described him as a
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="69"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=02-2138.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
P.C.</SPAN> were on brief for appellants. <P> <SPAN STYLE=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="68"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200016346.OPN.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Voyeur Dorm is a Florida limited liability company that maintains offices and conducts its business in Hillsborough County. That they are
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="68"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=03-1383.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Were on brief. Was on brief. We affirm. <P><CENTER><STRONG>I. <SPAN STYLE=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="68"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200216163.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Gumson who are visually impaired and use the Internet through a special software program called a
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="68"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/Apr1998/98a1821p.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The district court's grant of summary judgment was based on its conclusion that the FHC lacked standing under Article III of the United States Constitution to maintain this suit. Because we are convinced by the unique set of facts surrounding the section 3604(c) claims that the FHC has failed to satisfy the
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="68"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.villanova.edu/locator/3d/Jan2003/013475.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
We will vacate both the District Court's upward departure and its supervised release condition. They were assisted by John Flemming. He was arrested. Freeman waived his rights and admitted that he had loaded numerous images of child pornography 3 onto his laptop and that he knew his possession and transportation of child pornography was illegal. Freeman's guilty plea agreement was limited to evidence regarding his possession of child pornography. The records revealed that Freeman did not think it was wrong to engage in sexual relationships with young boys. Believed that Freeman was at great risk for relapsing into inappropriate sexual behavior. Freeman had two prior convictions for sexual misconduct which were not included in his Criminal History calculation because of their age. They are a 4 1973 conviction for a perverted sex act and a 1984 conviction for sexual assault of a minor. He admitted that he was a pedophile. Freeman did contend nevertheless that the
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="67"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200607/05-1371a.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Were on brief. Included among the employee rights enumerated in section 7 is the right
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="67"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200508/04-5266a.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Most of the casualties were Kenyan. The plaintiffs in this case are all Kenyan: victims. The latter provides that
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="67"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/D2DDF595CB19D39288256A9C005A3546/$file/0015101.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Or conspiracy to unreasonably restrain trade in professional golf and among professional golfers by agreeing to sponsor golf tournaments in accordance with PGA Tour rules and regulations.1 The sponsor defendants sought summary judgment solely on the basis that there was no actionable section 1 agreement among any of the defendants. It ruled that there was no direct evidence of such an agreement. 1 The plaintiff's claim against the PGA Tour is still pending in district court. 9806 and Toscano's circumstantial evidence failed to meet the summary judgment requirements of Matsushita Elec. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (1994) and we affirm. I The Senior PGA Tour was organized to showcase senior golfers who had previously been successful on the regular PGA Tour. Current eligibility regulations provide that the 78 player field in Senior PGA Tour events will be made up of (a) the top 31 available players from the previous year's Senior PGA Tour Money List. (b) the top 31 available players from the All Time Career Money List (including money won in PGA Tour and Senior PGA Tour events) who were not in the first list.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="67"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/fdocs/docs.fwx?submit=showbr&shofile=04-2671_013.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Who had worked at the station for six months but was terminated right before the offensive posting. Was accused of the misdeed by his former boss. WPWX FM is an urban contemporary radio station owned and operated by Dontron. While he was on paternity leave. The negotiations were ongoing when Cody was terminated and the purchase was never completed. I know he is responsible for this.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="67"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/E34876CC8ACB973F88256E5A00707AA1/$file/9855160.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
We must determine when a service mark is first used in commerce under the Lanham Act. We conclude that Pac Tel's first use of the mark was even earlier than that found by the district court. April 1990 was the first time LACOE began using the system on a non test basis. When the system was publicly launched. Pac Tel was developing customers among various vehicle fleet operating enterprises and had agreements with at least twenty four of them.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="67"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/19988288.OPN.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Spivey was tried and convicted of murder and armed robbery and sentenced to life imprisonment for the former and twenty years for the latter. Because it was based in part on the use of evidence gathered in a psychiatric examination of Spivey that was conducted in violation of his constitutional rights. 2 1 parking lot. Spivey was tried for the activities taking place in Columbus and convicted of murder. He was never charged with any sexual offense. 3 2 appealed to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. Spivey was tried and convicted again in Muscogee County. The State does not contend that the petition is successive. Spivey argues that 1) he was deprived of a fair trial because of pretrial publicity and the failure to change venue. 2) he was deprived of a fair trial by excessive security measures during the Spivey enumerated twenty four claims before the district court. In particular portions of medical records which were relied on by Spivey's psychiatric expert. 3) he was denied his right to a fair and impartial jury by the trial judge's restrictions on voir dire.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="67"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/19988288.MAN.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Spivey was tried and convicted of murder and armed robbery and sentenced to life imprisonment for the former and twenty years for the latter. Because it was based in part on the use of evidence gathered in a psychiatric examination of Spivey that was conducted in violation of his constitutional rights. 1 coming to investigate. Spivey was tried for the activities taking place in Columbus and convicted of murder. He was never charged with any sexual offense. 2 In November of 1983. Spivey was tried and convicted again in Muscogee County. The State does not contend that the petition is successive. Spivey argues that 1) he was deprived of a fair trial because of pretrial publicity and the failure to change venue. 2) he was deprived of a fair trial by excessive security measures during the trial. 3) he was denied his right to a fair and impartial jury by the trial judge's restrictions on voir dire. 4) he was denied a fundamentally fair trial by the prosecutor's improper arguments to the jury. 5) his prior vacated conviction was relied on in sentencing thus violating his Eighth Amendment rights under Johnson v.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="67"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/EDA7E49995BC06D888256A15005FA185/$file/9855160.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
We must determine when a service mark is first used in commerce under the Lanham Act. We conclude that Pac Tel's first use of the mark was even earlier than that found by the district court. April 1990 was the first time LACOE began using the system on a non test basis. When the system was publicly launched. Pac Tel was developing customers among various vehicle fleet operating enterprises and had agreements with at least twenty four of them.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="67"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/ea50059bc5df2783882569520074e699/d2ddf595cb19d39288256a9c005a3546/$FILE/0015101.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Or conspiracy to unreasonably restrain trade in professional golf and among professional golfers by agreeing to sponsor golf tournaments in accordance with PGA Tour rules and regulations.1 The sponsor defendants sought summary judgment solely on the basis that there was no actionable section 1 agreement among any of the defendants. It ruled that there was no direct evidence of such an agreement. 1 The plaintiff's claim against the PGA Tour is still pending in district court. 9806 and Toscano's circumstantial evidence failed to meet the summary judgment requirements of Matsushita Elec. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (1994) and we affirm. I The Senior PGA Tour was organized to showcase senior golfers who had previously been successful on the regular PGA Tour. Current eligibility regulations provide that the 78 player field in Senior PGA Tour events will be made up of (a) the top 31 available players from the previous year's Senior PGA Tour Money List. (b) the top 31 available players from the All Time Career Money List (including money won in PGA Tour and Senior PGA Tour events) who were not in the first list.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="67"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/ea50059bc5df2783882569520074e699/e48baf56d43f45eb88256e5a00707c16/$FILE/0015101.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Or conspiracy to unreasonably restrain trade in professional golf and among professional golfers by agreeing to sponsor golf tournaments in accordance with PGA Tour rules and regulations.1 The sponsor defendants sought summary judgment solely on the basis that there was no actionable section 1 agreement among any of the defendants. It ruled that there was no direct evidence of such an agreement. 1 The plaintiff's claim against the PGA Tour is still pending in district court. 9806 and Toscano's circumstantial evidence failed to meet the summary judgment requirements of Matsushita Elec. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (1994) and we affirm. I The Senior PGA Tour was organized to showcase senior golfers who had previously been successful on the regular PGA Tour. Current eligibility regulations provide that the 78 player field in Senior PGA Tour events will be made up of (a) the top 31 available players from the previous year's Senior PGA Tour Money List. (b) the top 31 available players from the All Time Career Money List (including money won in PGA Tour and Senior PGA Tour events) who were not in the first list.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="67"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=99-1952.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Were on brief. Disasters are said to bring out the best and the worst in people. The municipality of Toa Alta was badly hit and it sought federal disaster assistance monies from FEMA. The two were acquitted on extortion charges. Each was sentenced to a term of 57 months. The facts of the underlying crime are as follows.</FONT></P> <P><FONT FACE=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="67"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.fedcir.gov/opinions/04-1042.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
With him on the brief was Gregory J. With him on the brief was John Margiotta. The Board's refusal to register Palm Bay's VEUVE ROYALE mark is affirmed. 1 Paul R. Is a legal determination based upon factual underpinnings. Evidence is substantial if
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="67"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:8080/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcT1BOXDA1LTM2MjAtY3Zfb3BuLnBkZg==/05-3620-cv_opn.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
As Trustee of the Congel Family Trust which are General Partners of Woodchuck Hill Associates. As Trustee of the Congel Family Trust which are General Partners of Woodchuck Hill Associates. As Trustee of the Congel Family Trust which are General Partners of Woodchuck Hill Associates. Whether the media intervenors can appeal a district court order that was not a final judgment. None of whom are parties to this appeal. Arguing that these were
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="67"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/10circuit/apr97/95-6245.wpd.html">DAVIS V. GRACEY<BR></A><BR>
Is spelled incorrectly. A warrant was obtained to search his business premises. Davis was selling obscene CD ROMs from his business premises. The officer did not mention the possibility that a bulletin board was being operated on the premises. Davis were obscene. Attached to it were CD ROM drives housing sixteen CD ROM discs. Who was reputed to be more knowledgeable about computers than they were. The seizure of this computer equipment is the subject of the federal proceedings in this case. Davis was convicted of several counts of possessing and distributing obscenity. His conviction was upheld on appeal. Law enforcement officials have apparently disclaimed any interest in the materials in electronic storage. The crux of the complaint is that the seizure of the equipment was illegal because the warrant was not sufficiently particular and because the seized computer system contained e mail intended for private subscribers to the bulletin board. Plaintiffs contend these (1) Gayla Davis was. TSI Telecommunications is a corporation owned by Anthony and Gayla Davis.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="67"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:8080/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcT1BOXDAzLTE2ODBfb3BuLnBkZg==/03-1680_opn.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
We affirm in part and determine that his challenge to certain conditions is not ripe because their validity depends on changing technology. Balon's principal argument is that the conditions providing for probation office monitoring of Balon's use of computers are not reasonably related to the offense of conviction and involve a greater deprivation of liberty than reasonably necessary. Whether they involve a greater deprivation of liberty than reasonably necessary is a question that is governed by the state of computer technology. Because it is currently impossible to predict the state of computer technology at the commencement of Balon's supervised release period. BACKGROUND Balon pleaded guilty to and was convicted of one count of transporting child pornography in interstate commerce through the use of a computer in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2252A(a)(1). Was a convicted sexual offender for having abused his nine year old step sister. Admitted to police that he was sexually interested in prepubescent children.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="67"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/45E0EB82A5FE0A4088256B42007A7002/$file/0016415.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Plaintiffs alleged that the City and County of San Francisco violated the First Amendment and the California Constitution by formally disapproving of an advertising campaign that espoused the view that homosexuality is a sin and that homosexuals could change their sexual orientation. A full page advertisement was carried in the San Francisco Chronicle in 1998.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="67"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/982696.P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
McGraw and Rodd contend that the district court erred in denying them summary judgment on this claim because they are entitled to qualified immunity. Three of these solicitations are relevant to this case: (1) a
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="67"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//mar2000/98-8288.man.html">SPIVEY V. HEAD (3/28/2000, NO. 98-8288)<BR></A><BR>
Spivey was tried for the activities taking place in Columbus and convicted of murder. Spivey was tried and convicted again in Muscogee County. The State does not contend that the petition is successive. Spivey argues that 1) he was deprived of a fair trial because of pretrial publicity and the failure to change venue. 2) he was deprived of a fair trial by excessive security measures during the trial. 3) he was denied his right to a fair and impartial jury by the trial judge's restrictions on voir dire. 4) he was denied a fundamentally fair trial by the prosecutor's improper arguments to the jury. 5) his prior vacated conviction was relied on in sentencing thus violating his Eighth Amendment rights under </SPAN><SPAN STYLE=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="67"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/013.P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Mishann Chinn were found murdered in the Patuxent National Wildlife Refuge in Prince George's County. Dustin John Higgs was subsequently convicted by a federal jury of three counts of first degree premeditated murder. All of which are punishable by life imprisonment or death. Higgs was also convicted of three counts of using a firearm
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="67"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/98/08/972004P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Pruett was released from a 23 year federal penitentiary sentence for bank robbery. Apparently in exchange for his testimony against an underworld figure with whom he was serving time. Pruett was placed in the Federal Witness Protection Program in New Mexico. Carnuteson was found murdered. Among Pruett's more brutal offenses were the murder of Peggy Lowe. Since it was Sunday and most establishments were closed he decided to park his car in a secluded. Was alone. As Pruett recalled during his confession:
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="67"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/04a0314p-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="67"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/mar2000/98-8288.man.html">SPIVEY V. HEAD (3/28/2000, NO. 98-8288)<BR></A><BR>
Spivey was tried for the activities taking place in Columbus and convicted of murder. Spivey was tried and convicted again in Muscogee County. The State does not contend that the petition is successive. Spivey argues that 1) he was deprived of a fair trial because of pretrial publicity and the failure to change venue. 2) he was deprived of a fair trial by excessive security measures during the trial. 3) he was denied his right to a fair and impartial jury by the trial judge's restrictions on voir dire. 4) he was denied a fundamentally fair trial by the prosecutor's improper arguments to the jury. 5) his prior vacated conviction was relied on in sentencing thus violating his Eighth Amendment rights under </SPAN><SPAN STYLE=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="67"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/E48BAF56D43F45EB88256E5A00707C16/$file/0015101.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Or conspiracy to unreasonably restrain trade in professional golf and among professional golfers by agreeing to sponsor golf tournaments in accordance with PGA Tour rules and regulations.1 The sponsor defendants sought summary judgment solely on the basis that there was no actionable section 1 agreement among any of the defendants. It ruled that there was no direct evidence of such an agreement. 1 The plaintiff's claim against the PGA Tour is still pending in district court. 9806 and Toscano's circumstantial evidence failed to meet the summary judgment requirements of Matsushita Elec. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (1994) and we affirm. I The Senior PGA Tour was organized to showcase senior golfers who had previously been successful on the regular PGA Tour. Current eligibility regulations provide that the 78 player field in Senior PGA Tour events will be made up of (a) the top 31 available players from the previous year's Senior PGA Tour Money List. (b) the top 31 available players from the All Time Career Money List (including money won in PGA Tour and Senior PGA Tour events) who were not in the first list.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="66"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/23FE0B8E8A5093C188256D810068FB6F/$file/0255658.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Were also on the brief. Circuit Judge: This is a case involving a cruel and sadistic identity theft. We conclude that the service is statutorily immune pursuant to 47 U.S.C. § 230(c)(1). I Matchmaker.com is a commercial Internet dating service. Members are required to complete a detailed questionnaire containing both multiple choice and essay questions. Some of the potential multiple choice answers are innocuous. Some are sexually suggestive. (New members were permitted to post
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="66"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/033919np.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
We have jurisdiction to consider the District Court's order of June 30. Even though the notice of appeal states that the order being appealed is the District Court's order of August 27.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="66"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=02-1669.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The plaintiff sought declaratory and injunctive relief and at the outset moved for summary judgment on the ground that the statute is plainly unconstitutional. We hold that the district court was in error as to its standing. Ripeness and mootness rulings and that the criminal libel statute is unconstitutional as applicable to statements regarding public officials and public figures.</SPAN></P> <P><SPAN STYLE=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="66"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=94-2170.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Were on brief for appellant. Were on brief for appellee. We nevertheless find that the court's decision to close the proceedings was within its discretion and proper under the Act. On the same day that the juveniles were charged. Even if closure were discretionary. That the factors set forth and relied upon by the district court in its opinion are not sufficiently compelling to justify closure of the proceedings. Because these are purely questions of law. Our review is plenary. 1019 (1st Cir. 1991) (district court's interpretation of statute is reviewed de novo). The Act was intended
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="66"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/july2002/01-13725.opn.html">COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMM'N V. MASS MEDIA MKTG., INC. (7/22/2002, NO. 01-13725)<BR></A><BR>
They were not engaged in soliciting or accepting orders for options contracts. BACKGROUND</SPAN></P> <P><SPAN STYLE=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="66"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.fedcir.gov/opinions/03-1615r.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
With him on the brief were John B. With him on the brief were R. Of counsel were David W. Is withdrawn. This opinion is substituted therefor. We conclude that the district court was correct in sending the question of infringement of the system and apparatus claims to the jury. An
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="66"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//july2002/01-13725.opn.html">COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMM'N V. MASS MEDIA MKTG., INC. (7/22/2002, NO. 01-13725)<BR></A><BR>
They were not engaged in soliciting or accepting orders for options contracts. BACKGROUND</SPAN></P> <P><SPAN STYLE=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="66"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/dc/opinions/01opinions/01-7085a.html">DAVID J. GORMAN V. AMERITRADE<BR></A><BR>
Craig argued the cause for appellees.<span style=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="66"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/DA1BA54F49B327A788256B5300003E66/$file/0055009.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. I. Background Terri Welles was on the cover of Playboy in 1981 and was chosen to be the Playboy Playmate of the Year for 1981.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="66"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200510/04-1274b.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
With her on the brief were Austin C. Acting General Counsel at the time the brief was filed. Krasnow was on the brief for intervenor. 2 Before: GARLAND. The transfer was effected in two steps pursuant to a California state court order: first an involuntary assignment from Kidd to a trustee. Which was executed on July 15. [was] in lieu of the promissory note
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="66"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/fdocs/docs.fwx?submit=showbr&shofile=04-2572_021.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Are citizens of Albania. We have substituted the current Attorney General of the United States. Mirela's claims are derivative of Ermand's and thus the focus of the appeal is exclusively on Ermand Hysi's claims. Hysi admitted the factual allegations against him and conceded that he was removable. Hysi had other conflicts with his manager and was fired from his job in 1996 due to. Hysi testified that he filed a complaint seeking to get his job back but that complaint was reviewed by the same person who had fired him and thus was denied. He then filed a complaint with the High Court of Albania that was also denied. Hysi's job was to review claims for property. Verify which claims were legitimate and then recommend to the committee chairman whether the property in question should be returned to the claimant. Hysi averred that he was unable to help anyone retrieve their property because the committee chairman would instead give the property to people who paid bribes or were high ranking government officials. Hysi was also removed from the committee.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="66"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/dc/opinions/9_opinions/91-1516a.html">ACHERNAR BCAST CO V. FCC<BR></A><BR>
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="66"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200511924.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
O'Keefe required visitors to identify themselves and submit
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="66"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/200206/01-7085a.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
With him on the brief was Robert S. We consider whether the courts of the District of Columbia may assert general jurisdiction over a defendant that is
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="66"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/01/04/994021P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The issue before us in this appeal is whether Canon 5 of the Minnesota Code of Judicial Conduct. Were narrowly tailored to serve a compelling state interest in maintaining the independence and impartiality of Minnesota's judiciary. Were not impermissibly vague. I. The Minnesota Constitution provides that judges
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="65"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200503/04-1037a.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
With him on the briefs were Cynthia L. With him on the brief were R. Stetson were on the brief for intervenor Motion Picture Association of America. Although petitioners have an obvious interest in the rule. They plausibly contend that they will be adversely affected by its implementation. We indicated that
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="65"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/199809/97-1116c.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
O R D E R Respondent's and Intervenor's Suggestions of Rehearing En Banc and the response thereto have been circulated to the full court. The taking of a vote was requested. It is Ordered that the suggestions be denied. Dissenting from the denial of the suggestions of rehearing en banc is attached. Dissenting from the denial of the suggestions of rehearing en banc is also attached. At issue are equal employment opportunity regulations promulgated by the Federal Communications Commission (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="65"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/fed/opinions/99opinions/99-5152.html">CAROL JUDY HIGASHI V. U.S.<BR></A><BR>
With him on the brief were <u>David . Higashi nor her family were under any legal restraint preventing their return to their original place of residence. Higashi was born in Boise. Were relocated from their home in Sacramento. Under the order Japanese and Americans of Japanese ancestry were removed from Western coastal regions to guarded camps. None were applicable to Mr. Tsumura did not receive any personal notice from the WRA that he was free to leave Boise. Higashi was born after the date of rescission of the general exclusion orders. Plaintiff asserts that the Tsumura family was unaware that the Government had eliminated the exclusion of persons of Japanese ancestry from California until almost a year later. That plaintiff's losses were ". Noting that plaintiff was born after her parents were granted permanent leave from the internment camp in California. S subjective beliefs of whether he or she was or was not under the control of the WRA. Higashi was not born until after January 20. Higashi appeals.</p> <p ALIGN=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="65"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/Aug1997/97a1680p.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
31 U.S.C. §§ 3729 3733. 2 The district court dismissed Dunleavy's Second Amended Complaint on the ground that it lacked subject matter jurisdiction because the action was based solely on information or allegations that had been publicly disclosed through various newspaper articles. This appeal raises issues which require us to further define the circumstances under which a qui tam action will be deemed to be
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="65"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/C2EFBED4DA930CDA8825706E004F3CC1/$file/0355957.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Will & Emery. Inc. (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="65"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/dc/opinions/97opinions/97-1116c.html">LUTHERAN CHCH MO V. FCC<BR></A><BR>
<i>Circuit Judges.</i><p> <p> <p> <p> <i>O R D E R</i> <p> <p> Respondent's and Intervenor's Suggestions of Rehearing <i><p> En Banc</i> and the response thereto have been circulated to <p> <p> <p> the full court. The taking of a vote was requested. It is<p> <p> <b>Ordered</b> that the suggestions be denied.<p> <p> <b>Per Curiam</b><p> <p> <b>FOR THE COURT:</b><p> <p> Mark J. Dissenting from the denial of the <p> suggestions of rehearing <i>en banc</i> is attached.<p> <p> <p> <p> A statement filed by <i>Circuit Judge</i> Tatel. Dissenting from the denial of <p> the suggestions of rehearing <i>en banc</i> is also attached.<p> <p> <p> <p> <i>Circuit Judge</i> Rogers would grant the suggestions of re <p> hearing <i>en banc</i>.<i><p> </i><p> <p> <p> <i>Circuit Judge</i> Garland did not participate in this matter.<p> <p> <p> Separate statement filed by <i>Chief Judge</i> Edwards. The panel in this case has created a constitu <p> tional issue where none exists.<p> <p> At issue are equal employment opportunity regulations <p> promulgated by the Federal Communications Commission <p> (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="65"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/Jan2001/989009.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Circuit Judge: This is an appeal from the denial of a petition for a writ of habeas corpus in a capital case. Riley pleaded not guilty to all of the charges and was tried by jury in Kent County Superior Court in December 1982. He was represented by appointed counsel. Riley placed a quart bottle of beer on the counter and announced that the store was being robbed. The prosecution intr oduced evidence that Riley's fingerprints were found on the bottle of beer that had been placed on the counter. Riley took the stand in his own defense and testified that he was in Philadelphia with his mother celebrating her birthday when the robbery occurred. Although Riley's mother was present in court at the beginning of the trial. No other alibi witnesses were presented. The penalty phase of the trial was held. After Riley was sentenced on the remaining counts for which he had been convicted. This claim is procedurally barred.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="65"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/004600.P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Circuit Judge: Ronald Ellyson was convicted of possessing child pornography in violation of 18 U.S.C.A. § 2252A(a)(5)(B). Because the court's instructions were erroneous under Free Speech Coalition. Officers from the Boiling Springs Lake Police Department in North Carolina received information that two larceny suspects were guests at a trailer owned by Ellyson. A woman who was living in Ellyson's trailer at the time. During the time that officers were in the trailer. Ellyson was arrested for possessing child pornography. Burr testified that various officers told her that if law enforcement officers searched the trailer again and
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="64"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/july2001/00-12665.man.html">NAT'L LABOR RELATIONS BD. V. GLADES HEALTH CARE CTR. (7/20/2001, NO. 00-12665)<BR></A><BR>
The Company cross petitions for review and to have set aside orders of the Board (1) certifying the Union as the collective bargaining representative for certain of the Company's employees and (2) finding that the Company engaged in an unfair labor practice by refusing to bargain with the Union in violation of § 8(a)(5) of the National Labor Relations Act. The Company claims that its refusal is justified and the Board should have set aside the election because (1) the Union engaged in campaign practices that are prohibited under </SPAN><SPAN STYLE=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="64"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//july2001/00-12665.man.html">NAT'L LABOR RELATIONS BD. V. GLADES HEALTH CARE CTR. (7/20/2001, NO. 00-12665)<BR></A><BR>
The Company cross petitions for review and to have set aside orders of the Board (1) certifying the Union as the collective bargaining representative for certain of the Company's employees and (2) finding that the Company engaged in an unfair labor practice by refusing to bargain with the Union in violation of § 8(a)(5) of the National Labor Relations Act. The Company claims that its refusal is justified and the Board should have set aside the election because (1) the Union engaged in campaign practices that are prohibited under </SPAN><SPAN STYLE=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="64"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/4A41B1D160D65AB388256EC2007E4D94/$file/0256937.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
I. Background Schwarzenegger is a resident of California. He was a private citizen and movie star. Schwarzenegger was generally cast as the lead character in so called
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="64"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/dc/opinions/94opinions/94-5247a.html">COMPUTER PROFS SCL V. US SCRT SVC<BR></A><BR>
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="64"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/dc/opinions/95opinions/95-1123a.html">UNITED FOOD CMERCL V. NLRB<BR></A><BR>
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="64"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/001351.P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Circuit Judge: We are presented with an issue of first impression whether an Internet service provider enjoys a safe harbor from copyright infringement liability as provided by Title II of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="64"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/032038p.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Circuit Judges *Judge Chertoff heard oral argument in this case but resigned prior to the time the opinion was filed. The opinion is filed by a quorum of the panel. 28 U.S.C. § 46(d). Circuit Judge: This appeal requires us to decide whether a showing of willful infringement is a prerequisite to an accounting of a trademark infringer's profits for a violation of section 43(a) of the Lanham Act. We hold that wilfulness is an important equitable factor but not a prerequisite to such an award. I. Factual Background and Procedural History Joseph Renosky was a member of the board of directors of Banjo Buddies. Banjo Buddies' principal product during that time was an extremely successful fishing lure called the Banjo Minnow. The Banjo Minnow was principally advertised via
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="64"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/40074AB1B7D4FD138825712B00725321/$file/0330262.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Common sense decision
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="64"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:8080/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcT1BOXDA0LTI0MzItY3Jfb3BuLnBkZg==/04-2432-cr_opn.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Jurors' names that were disclosed in open court. A former executive of Credit Suisse First Boston (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="63"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/051070p.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The caption when the appeal was initially docketed included the captions for all the individual actions. Which was the investment advisor to the Alliance Premier Growth Fund. Are before us on appellants' appeal of the District Court's dismissal of their complaint on statute of limitations grounds. We will affirm. ¶¶ 348 50 (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="63"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/dc/opinions/93opinions/93-5301a.html">ISKCON OF POTOMAC V. RIDENOUR JAMES M.<BR></A><BR>
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="63"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/06a0224n-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Robinson is serving a life sentence in a Michigan prison for the felony murder of Mary Rook. I. Mary Rook was murdered on March 17. He was charged with first degree felonymurder. Compagnari was tried separately. He was acquitted of first degree murder but convicted of larceny and being an accessory after the fact. A state district court judge who was running for reelection. The flyers said:
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="63"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200416304.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Peebles objected to the removal contending that the minimum amount in controversy required for subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1332 was not met. I. BACKGROUND Peebles is a real estate developer who was a member of several public2 private partnerships that developed city owned properties into hotels or other uses and who worked on other private sector real estate development opportunities. Peebles' profession demanded that he have financial liquidity to comply with government fiscal mandates and those of commercial lenders. At the time the account was opened. Peebles stated account objectives were total return with a risk tolerance of moderate. Peebles advised Slaughter that his profession required him to have readily available funds and that he was therefore risk averse and unwilling to invest in highly speculative securities. Peebles was involved in the management of his investments and exercised control over his account. Boeing. 3 Peebles was not enthusiastic about these recommendations and rejected them indicating that he was looking for higher returns than such investments would yield.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="62"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/043607p.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Introduction Petitioner's father was killed in cold blood. The 2 government concedes that he is dead. That murder and what preceded and followed it is the event on which her application for asylum. Relief under the Convention Against Torture (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="62"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/012028.P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
I. The Internet is an
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="62"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:8080/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcT1BOXDA0LTU4NTItY3Zfb3BuLnBkZg==/04-5852-cv_opn.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Leo Kirch is the founder of KirchGroup. Who was the chief executive officer of Deutsche Bank. Stated during a German language interview by a journalist in New York City that Breuer doubted whether the financial community was willing to lend KirchGroup the money it needed to survive the 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 liquidity crisis it faced. Kirch asserts that this statement was Less false and that Breuer knew it was false when he made it. than three months later. The complaint was amended to add as a plaintiff International Television Trading Corp. (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="62"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:8080/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcT1BOXDA0LTU4NTItY3YgdyBFcnJhdGEucGRm/04-5852-cv%20w%20Errata.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Leo Kirch is the founder of KirchGroup. Who was the chief executive officer of Deutsche Bank. Stated during a German language interview by a journalist in New York City that Breuer doubted whether the financial community was willing to lend KirchGroup the money it needed to survive the liquidity crisis it faced. Kirch asserts that this statement was 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 false and that Breuer knew it was false when he made it. The complaint was amended to add as a plaintiff International Television Trading Corp. (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="62"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/07a0587n-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
I. BACKGROUND Penton is in the business of operating trade shows. FM is a seller of property insurance policies. Or
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="62"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:8080/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcT1BOXDA0LTU4NTItY3YgQW1lbmRlZC5wZGY=/04-5852-cv%20Amended.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Leo Kirch is the founder of KirchGroup. Who was the chief executive officer of Deutsche Bank. Stated during a German language interview by a journalist in New York City that Breuer doubted whether the financial community was willing to lend KirchGroup the money it needed to survive the liquidity crisis it faced. Kirch asserts that this statement was Less false and that Breuer knew it was false when he made it. 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 than three months later. The complaint was amended to add as a plaintiff International Television Trading Corp. (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="62"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/05/08/994021P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
This case is before us en banc upon remand from the United States Supreme Court. Believing that it will be helpful in analyzing the issues presented. At issue were the so called
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="62"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/oct99/98-2651.man.html">MACUBA V. DEBOER (10/29/1999, NO. 98-2651)<BR></A><BR>
They contended that they were immune from suit under the doctrines of absolute and qualified immunity. We reverse.</P> <P><CENTER>I.</CENTER> </P> <P> Joseph Macuba was. Part of his job was to investigate complaints against builders and the failure of his co workers to enforce county building codes. Questioned DeBoer about the situation.</P> <P> This was not the first time that an investigation conducted by Macuba resulted in inquiries from the media. He was elected in November. Matthew sent an anonymous letter criticizing Macuba to the Board of Commissioners.<A HREF=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="62"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/19982651.OPN.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
They contended that they were immune from suit under the doctrines of absolute and qualified immunity. I. Joseph Macuba was. Part of his job was to investigate complaints against builders and the failure of his co workers to enforce county building codes. This was not the first time that an investigation conducted by Macuba resulted in inquiries from the media. He was elected in November. Matthew sent an anonymous letter criticizing Macuba to the Board of Commissioners.1 Appellant Michael Youseff was elected to the Board of County Commissioners in November 1992. 2 Youseff asked Spatz where he was obtaining the information for his stories. Spatz revealed that Macuba was one of his principle sources. Youseff wrote the county attorney that Macuba was responsible for some of Spatz's criticism of the county government. All four were administered separately. This would save resources and provide owners and contractors with
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="62"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/19982651.MAN.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
They contended that they were immune from suit under the doctrines of absolute and qualified immunity. I. Joseph Macuba was. Part of his job was to investigate complaints against builders and the failure of his co workers * Honorable Myron H. This was not the first time that an investigation conducted by Macuba resulted in inquiries from the media. He was elected in November. Matthew sent an anonymous letter criticizing Macuba to the Board of Commissioners.1 Appellant Michael Youseff was elected to the Board of County Commissioners in November 1992. 2 Youseff asked Spatz where he was obtaining the information The letter is apparently not in the record. Neither the record nor the parties' briefs indicate the nature of the criticisms. 2 1 The record is unclear with respect to the date. 2 for his stories. Spatz revealed that Macuba was one of his principle sources. Youseff wrote the county attorney that Macuba was responsible for some of Spatz's criticism of the county government. All four were administered separately.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="62"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.villanova.edu/locator/3d/Dec2001/989009r.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Was sentenced to death on the vote of a Delaware state jury in December 1982. It is not because there has been undue delay at any stage but because the case raises legitimate questions that go to the constitutionality of the original trial and sentencing. It was necessary to complete a series of proceedings in both state and federal court. Placed a bottle of beer on the counter and announced the store was being robbed. Who was then hopping up and down. As Riley and Baxter were proceeding to the door to leave. Williams were indicted on charges of felony murder. Baxter pled guilty to first degree murder and was sentenced to life imprisonment in exchange for his testimony against Riley. The murder and weapon charges against Williams were also dropped in exchange for his testimony against Riley. He was subsequently convicted of the robbery and conspiracy charges. Riley was represented at trial by appointed counsel. His pretrial motions for co counsel and funds for a private investigator were denied. The prosecutors in Riley's case were James Liguori and Mark McNulty.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="62"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/Aug1997/97a1691p.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Kenneth McBroom pled guilty to and was convicted of one count of possession of child pornography in violation of 18 U.S.C. Finding that McBroom was able. The district court concluded that McBroom was ineligible for a downward departure. We believe that the district court could have considered the possibility that McBroom suffered from a volitional impairment which prevented him from controlling his behavior or conforming it to the law. We will. McBroom detailed his abusive childhood in an uncontradicted affidavit submitted to the district court: All outward appearances of my family were positive but deceiving. . . . I have vague recollections of being a young boy and having him bathe me. I suppose I was four or five at the time. I have clear memories of the abuse from about the age of ten onward. . . . There were also a few instances in which my father took Polaroid pictures of me naked. . . . Until I was 15 years old. 3 McBroom Aff. McBroom attended law school and was married. He was asked to testify at his father's trial on charges that his father sexually molested a neighbor's son.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="62"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//oct99/98-2651.man.html">MACUBA V. DEBOER (10/29/1999, NO. 98-2651)<BR></A><BR>
They contended that they were immune from suit under the doctrines of absolute and qualified immunity. We reverse.</P> <P><CENTER>I.</CENTER> </P> <P> Joseph Macuba was. Part of his job was to investigate complaints against builders and the failure of his co workers to enforce county building codes. Questioned DeBoer about the situation.</P> <P> This was not the first time that an investigation conducted by Macuba resulted in inquiries from the media. He was elected in November. Matthew sent an anonymous letter criticizing Macuba to the Board of Commissioners.<A HREF=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="62"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200501/02-1244a.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
With him on the briefs were Karyn K. With them on the briefs was Mark J. With her on the briefs were Ronald A. With him on the brief were Peter D. The Librarian's decision was based on proceedings before a Copyright Arbitration Royalty Panel (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="62"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/199808/98-3077d.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Cohen were on the petition and reply. Were on the response. We conclude that we have power to determine the issues presented by the petition.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="62"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/1998/01/96-6371.htm">96-6371 -- TRANSWESTERN PUBLISHING CO. V. MULTIMEDIA MARKETING ASSOCIATES INC. -- 01/08/1998<BR></A><BR>
The account executives arranged information so that it was
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="62"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/984168.P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Circuit Judge: Prior to a criminal trial in which he was a participating lawyer. Morrissey was convicted of two counts of criminal contempt for violating Local Criminal Rule 57 (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="62"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/02/01/992356P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The defendant hospitals are Unity Hospital. Also named as defendants are hospital employees John Murphy and Allina Health System Corp. Which is an
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="62"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/96/08/953988P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
We affirm the district court's judgment in favor of the television station because the reporting crew was not acting under color of state law when it entered the Parkers' house. I. We will summarize the district court's findings of fact. With which the parties seem to have no dispute. Louis police and told them that he was interested in developing a television news story about the police department's efforts to eradicate illegal weapons. The police told the reporter that a weapons investigation was in progress that he might be interested in covering. Executed the search warrant at the Parkers' residence. 2 They entered followed the two weapons charges were the search. residence on through an unlocked front door. The district court also noted that the chief of police testified that his department's policy was to require the media to obtain permission to videotape private citizens whose houses were being searched. The supervising officer on the scene was not supposed to allow the media to enter a private residence.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="62"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=93-1692.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Wainwright & Wainwright were on brief. Smith & Cohen were on brief. Is this: Can a Massachusetts based court. Assert jurisdiction over a California resident who is alleged to have made a defamatory comment during an unsolicited telephone interview with a staff reporter for a Massachusetts newspaper? Alioto is an attorney practicing in California. Alioto is pressing a class action in the California courts against Ticketmaster Southern California. Is affiliated with Ticketmaster New York. Both Ticketmaster entities are engaged in the business of selling ducats to entertainment events. The record is equally barren of any showing that Alioto solicited the inquiry2 or that more than one call occurred. It is clear. Who was in California. At no point does the article refer by name to either T NY or T SC. 2Although there is a passing allusion in the record to a press release issued by Alioto regarding the lawsuit against T SC. There is no indication that he forwarded this release to Massachusetts or that it sparked the Globe's story. 3 gouging in New York and California.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="62"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/B7C562F79A6F968B88256F020058E953/$file/0355179.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="60"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/2F934FCAAA1BF8F888256E5A00707DAD/$file/9915602.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Is amended as follows: At Slip Op. 13304 13305.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="60"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/199807/96-7246a.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Mause were on the briefs. During the mid 1980s C&W and CCC entered into a joint venture in which CCC was to develop a Caribbean wide FM broadcast ing system that C&W would then use to offer an FM paging service. CBS later sought and was granted leave to file a First Amended Com plaint in order to correct a technical error in its description of the ownership of CBS. The court explained that the complaint
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="60"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/05a0466p-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
White was sentenced to death. (8) whether White's Fifth Amendment right against self incrimination was violated by the introduction at trial of statements made by White during a competency evaluation. (9) whether White was entitled to discovery and an evidentiary hearing in district court. Was believable as an impartial juror was contrary to or an unreasonable application of Supreme Court precedent. Told her that he was not going to his job at Kroger's warehouse. White was intoxicated and wanted to be left alone. He began screaming at his mother after she asked him to quiet down because she was concerned that someone might call the police due to the noise. White was afraid of a confrontation with the police because he was on probation for carrying a concealed weapon and believed that the police had harassed him on prior occasions. While White was struggling with a clip for a gun. Trooper Gross called in the car's license plate number and learned that the car was registered to White and that White did not have driving privileges due to a prior drunk driving conviction.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="60"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=91-2256.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Lubart was on brief for Robert A. Were on brief for the Internal Revenue Service et al. 1 *Of the District of Rhode Island. I Background Robert Aronson is a lawyer who specializes in finding persons to whom the government owes money and. Helping them obtain the money that is their due. 3 3 Insofar as he finds people whom the agency would not otherwise have found. Insofar as he finds and charges people whom the agency would have located on its own. His service is less beneficial. 188 (1st Cir. 1987) (Department's
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="60"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:8080/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcT1BOXDA0LTM0MjYtY3Zfb3BuLnBkZg==/04-3426-cv_opn.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Where he was eventually 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 found. Viertel moved to vacate the default judgment principally on the ground that service of process was invalid under the Hague Convention. He argued that service was improper because the French authorities did not complete the required Certificate of service. The Burda We now hold that: (1) service of process in this case complied with the Hague Convention because the police report completed by the French authorities who effected service was an adequate substitute for the formal Certificate. A few days after the complaint was filed. attempted personal service on Viertel and his companies in New York because the companies operated out of offices in New York and Viertel maintained an apartment there as well. service attempt. Was unsuccessful. Viertel and his companies were ultimately traced to France. Who eventually settled and is not a party to this appeal. Blumenberg was later criminally prosecuted and convicted in connection with this scheme.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="60"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/05/03/041211P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Arguing that there was no probable cause for the search of his residence. That his convictions are constitutionally infirm. Paul Police Department was contacted by a mother concerned about a document on her family computer. Dlbch15 added that he would like to see AM if he were going to drive to St. Schaub also discovered that the nickname dlbch15 was linked to the email address dlbch15@prodigy.com. Further investigation revealed that Bach was a registered sex offender because of a 1995 state conviction for criminal sexual conduct in the third degree. Involving sex with a fourteen year old boy. 2 3 Initials are used when minors are referenced. The warrant was faxed from Minnesota to Yahoo! in Santa Clara. Inside was a zip disk containing all of the emails preserved in the accounts belonging to AM and Bach (dlbch15@yahoo.com). Among them was one dated August 1. That transmission is the basis for Bach's conviction for receiving child pornography. Below the image was the name of AC. An IP is generated when one computer connects with another through the internet.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="60"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/05a0043p-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Ventura maintained that he was a The Honorable Robert B. Who was a member of the panel. Were investigating Chiquita's business practices as background for a series of newspaper articles on the company. Ventura himself told Chiquita that he was speaking with Gallagher. In an apparent effort to convince Chiquita that he was not a confidential source. Not informing anybody that I was a confidential source. Chiquita knew that Ventura was gaining access to voice mailboxes of employees at a time when such access was not authorized. 1 No. 03 3440 Ventura v. Was convicted of multiple counts of Attempted Unauthorized Access to a Computer System. Was placed on probation for two years. Where Ventura was a member of a law firm. The district court also determined that summary judgment was proper because Ohio law granted
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="60"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/199807/97-1138a.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
With him on the briefs was Jonathan J. With him on the briefs were Christopher J. Bur stein were on the brief for intervenor National Cable Televi sion Association. Sohn were on the briefs for intervenors Center for Media Education. The greater the percentage of channels the operator must set aside.1 'Leased access' was 1 Subject to the rates. Or if the program mers' offerings competed with those the operators were providing. Imple mentation of Section 10 of the Cable Consumer Protection and Competition Act of 1992: Indecent Programming and (A) An operator of any cable system with 36 or more (but not more than 54) activated channels shall designate 10 percent of such channels which are not otherwise required for use (or the use of which is not prohibited) by Federal law or regulation. (B) An operator of any cable system with 55 or more (but not more than 100) activated channels shall designate 15 percent of such channels which are not otherwise required for use (or the use of which is not prohibited) by Federal law or regulation.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="60"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/E08BCB17D279E4BF88256B2F007480A3/$file/9915602.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Is amended as follows: At Slip Op. 13304 13305.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="60"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=00-2545.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Horodyski</U> was on brief for appellant.</FONT> <P><FONT FACE=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="60"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/F6CCB316BDBAB4E4882572D0007F9B8C/$file/0435468.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
MSN is a division of Microsoft offering Internet access services. Odom alleged that if the customer was paying by debit or credit card the Best Buy employee would scan the Trial CD. The Best Buy employee would claim it was for
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="60"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/E7B3C70738A87C6D88256E5A00707CCB/$file/9915602.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Is withdrawn. Are at liberty to file new petitions with respect to the new opinion. We have jurisdiction over this matter pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. The last of whom was P.J. Saying
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="60"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/200001/99-3024a.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
This is the second time that this case has come before this court. This court held that there is no First Amendment right of access to grand jury ancillary proceedings. The decision in Dow Jones also made it clear that appellants have neither a statutory right. The only issue left unresolved in Dow Jones was the meaning of the District Court's Local Criminal Rule 6.1 (formerly Local Rule 302. The District Court held that it was under no legal obligation to establish a generic rule. Press and other media organizations are allowed to file motions for public docketing in individual cases. The District Court's judgment denying appellants' request for a generic rule requiring public docketing of all grand jury related matters is affirmed. There is no constitutional. Appellants acknowledge that there is not even a widespread practice of public docketing of grand jury matters in the federal courts in the United States. The appellants' alternative request for relief is less trouble some. The District Court will duly consider the request and will.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="60"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/fed/opinions/02opinions/02-1232.html">STORAGE TECHNOLOGY CORPORATION V. CISCO SYSTEMS<BR></A><BR>
Argued for plaintiff third party plaintiff appellant.<span style='mso spacerun:yes'> </span>With him on the brief was <u>Thomas A. Argued for defendants appellees.<span style='mso spacerun:yes'> </span>With him on the brief was <u>Edward R. Reines</u>.<span style='mso spacerun:yes'> </span>Of counsel was <u>Sarkis Beudjekian</u>.</p> <p class=MsoNormal><o:p> . Cisco) alleging infringement of both patents.<span style='mso spacerun:yes'> </span>After the case was transferred to the Northern District of California. Such as fiber optic cables.<span style='mso spacerun:yes'> </span>Data flowing through a network is divided into packets for transmission over the network.<span style='mso spacerun:yes'> </span>For example. Which are set by system administrators.<span style='mso spacerun:yes'> </span>One such policy may be that packets belonging to certain types of messages get transmission priority over other packets.<span style='mso spacerun:yes'> </span>Another such policy may be that packets from a particular source are not to be forwarded through the network.<span style='mso spacerun:yes'> </span>Network policy information is typically stored in the main memory of a network device.</p> <p class=MsoHeader style='text indent:.5in.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="60"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/F9FB7DBF03E29BAF88256AC700597280/$file/9915602.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Is withdrawn. Are at liberty to file new petitions with respect to the new opinion. We have jurisdiction over this matter pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. The last of whom was P.J. Saying
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="59"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/9888406F8A5B111D88256B8200077F52/$file/0115466.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. RIO operates a website that informs prospective customers about its hotel and allows those enticed by Lady Luck to make reservations. 4468 RII is a Costa Rican entity that participates in an Internet sports gambling operation. Which was not authorized to accept service on RII's behalf. RII's 4470 eventual responses were almost entirely useless. 3 permits service in a place not within any judicial district of the United States
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="59"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200313011.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
(2) the murals were school sponsored speech. (3) Appellees' response was reasonably related to legitimate pedagogical objectives. While the school was undergoing long term remodeling. Students were prevented from walking into construction areas by dozens of large plywood panels in interior and exterior hallways. These panels were ugly. Students were invited to paint murals on the panels. Three of these murals were most notable. Sharah's first mural was next to the school's main office. Sharah's second mural was only a few panels down from the office and read. Do you have time for Him?
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="59"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/199808/98-3077a.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Cohen were on the petition and reply. Were on the response. We conclude that we have power to determine the issues presented by the petition. The district court read our decision in Barry as holding that once a prima facieviolation of Rule 6(e)(2) is established. The court is required to conduct an adversarial hearing at which the prosecutor must show cause why he should not be held in contempt. The IC was ordered to produce. Reasoning that the factors for granting a stay pending appeal were not met. The court found that the IC's likelihood of prevailing on the merits of its appeal was low given the court's conclusion that the orders are not even appealable. That the harm to movants of granting a stay was substantial because without an immediate show cause hearing. Because discovery was set to begin on July 11. We ordered an administrative stay of the district court's procedural orders so that we would have sufficient opportunity to consider the merits of the petition for writ of mandamus. We now conclude that we have power to determine the issues presented in the petition.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="58"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=95-2216.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
P.A. were on brief for appellants. Were on brief for appellees. Falsely stated and implied to the local and national news media that Daniel Aversa was involved in laundering illegally gotten money. Found the statements to have been
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="58"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/99/02/973972P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
We have appellate jurisdiction over the district court's final order pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. The notice of appeal was timely filed pursuant to Fed. United States District Judge for the District of Minnesota. 22 1 BACKGROUND FACTS Most of the facts are not disputed. The following statement of facts is taken in large part from the district court's memorandum opinion and order. Fried is a
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="58"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca10.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=03-9570.wpd">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
This is a whistleblower action brought by Adrienne Anderson (Anderson) against Metro Wastewater Reclamation District (Metro) pursuant to various environmental statutes which prohibit discrimination against
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="58"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/june2001/99-6071.man.html">O'FERRELL V. UNITED STATES (6/11/2001, NO. 99-6071)<BR></A><BR>
The lawsuit was based on actions taken by federal law enforcement agents in 1990 when the plaintiffs were targets of a massive investigation of a group of mail bombings and attempted mail bombings that took place in December of 1989.</SPAN></P> <P><SPAN STYLE=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="58"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/992459.P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Concluding that these State parties were indispensable parties under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 19. Are subject to review by State public service commissions and thereafter. The parties found themselves in a dispute over whether Bell Atlantic had to pay reciprocal compensation for its subscribers' telephone calls made to Internet Service Providers (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="58"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//june2001/99-6071.man.html">O'FERRELL V. UNITED STATES (6/11/2001, NO. 99-6071)<BR></A><BR>
The lawsuit was based on actions taken by federal law enforcement agents in 1990 when the plaintiffs were targets of a massive investigation of a group of mail bombings and attempted mail bombings that took place in December of 1989.</SPAN></P> <P><SPAN STYLE=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="58"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2003/03/01-1576.htm">01-1576 -- MINSHALL V. MCGRAW HILL BROADCASTING CO. INC. -- 03/28/2003<BR></A><BR>
The jury also found that McGraw Hill's conduct was willful. The question of whether Minshall was entitled to front pay was reserved for the district court. Minshall was over 50 years old. <p> At trial. Evidence was introduced that in 1995. Minshall testified that he apologized for his conduct at the Emmy Awards ceremony and admitted that he was partially at fault for the disclosure of the source's identity. The cosmetic look of the news programs was altered. Were removed from the ten o'clock nightly news and replaced by anchor Natalie Pujo (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="58"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/Apr1998/98a1822p.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
We will affirm the order of the district court. Describes itself as a non profit organization whose
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="58"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/05a0409p-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Plaintiff Peter Scovill filed this action against his former employer claiming he was discriminated against on account of his age in violation of the Age Discrimination Employment Act [
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="58"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/042352p.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
We will affirm. Had been arrested for allegedly raping a sevenyear old girl he was babysitting. Of Farmington Sunday on charges he allegedly raped a 7 year old girl he was babysitting at her Uniontown home Friday evening. Bowley turned himself in to police Sunday at 5:45 p.m. and was charged with two counts of rape and one count each of indecent assault. Charges against Bowley were filed at the Connellsville Juvenile Detention Facility. Where he is being held. It does not appear that Bowley was actually prosecuted. 3 1 After seeing the report of his arrest in the newspaper. Because there was a federal claim. Relying on the Report and Recommendation from At the time the case was filed. Was a minor. The District Court's grant of the motion to dismiss is a final order. Which we have jurisdiction to review pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. Only if it is certain that no relief could be granted under the facts pleaded may we affirm. The Herald Standard argues that the breach of confidentiality claim is not cognizable under Pennsylvania law and that Bowley cannot establish each element of the invasion of privacy claim.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="58"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/953093.P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
We will not consider the qualified immunity defense in this posture. I. Plaintiff Appellee Suarez Corporation Industries (SCI) is an Ohio corporation that markets its goods through direct mail sweepstakes promotions and other contests. Elizabeth Pishner are West Virginia residents who have purchased goods from SCI or participated in its promotions. Plaintiffs Appellees are collectively referred to as SCI. McGraw is the Attorney General of West Virginia and Rodd is a Senior Assistant Attorney General. Several of SCI's marketing schemes were temporarily enjoined by the state courts. While that motion was pending. Are brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C.§ 1983. The remaining claims are based on state law. The principal bases for these claims are that McGraw and Rodd accelerated enforcement proceedings against SCI after the newspaper ad. That McGraw and Rodd have disseminated derogatory information about other legal proceedings against SCI to the media and Dun & Bradstreet. The district court's only explanation was provided in a footnote: Plaintiffs' First Amended Complaint is not a model pleading in several respects.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="58"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/00/12/984040P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Was killed along with three other crew members when their CH 47 military helicopter struck a set of defendant's power lines strung approximately 100 feet over the Osage River in central Missouri. (10) whether the verdict was against the weight of the evidence.2 We affirm. Defendant owed a duty of the highest degree of care because defendant is supplier of electricity. We are bound by the highest state court's pronouncement of state law. The Missouri Supreme Court determined that ordinary care is the correct standard of care in the circumstances of this case. Both motions are granted. Plaintiffs' motion is denied as moot. 3 2 B. The plaintiffs could have intervened in the state case. Whereas the district court determined that there was no basis for comparative fault. The application of collateral estoppel in diversity cases is determined according to state law. Trial courts have broad discretion in permitting the offensive use of collateral estoppel. We concluded that the district court did not abuse its discretion in refusing to apply collateral estoppel because the issues in the two cases were not identical and plaintiffs could have joined the state case.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="58"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/Aug2001/995485.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The order was issued in connection with an in camera hearing where plaintiffs' attorneys. We will vacate the sanction.1 1. Because a full procedural and factual background of the Cendant litigation is set forth in numerous published opinions. 2 we will only discuss the facts most relevant to the resolution of the issues presented in this appeal. Cendant Corporation announced that it had uncovered substantial accounting irregularities and would have to restate reported annual and quarterly earnings for 1997 and possibly earlier. Some 64 lawsuits (mostly class actions) were filed against Cendant. All but one were consolidated. Among the fifteen motions filed was one submitted by Sirota. To have their clients. Appointed as lead plaintiffs and to have themselves appointed lead counsel. The Cendant cases have also spawned a number of appeals to our Court. Neither Aboff nor Wilson was selected as a lead plaintiff. Reasoning that
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="58"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/dc/opinions/93opinions/93-1652a.html">AMER SCHLST TV PGRM V. FCC<BR></A><BR>
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="58"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/07/08/063734P.pdf">N:\DOCS\MELISSA\06-3734 U.S. V. FARRINGTON OPN.7-31.WPD<BR></A><BR>
Byron Farrington was convicted of 34 counts of wire fraud. That his sentence is unreasonable. Chicago in early 2003.4 Potential customers were told that Converge Now subscribers would begin receiving wireless Internet service within 30 days after payment of a one time equipment installation fee of $250.00 and the first month's service fee of $29.95 were paid. Was incapable of providing the services it advertised. 995 for the ads were returned for insufficient funds. The radio ads in each of these cities were also pulled after checks to each broadcast company were returned for insufficient funds. 24 3
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="58"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/05a0220p-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The only issue on appeal is whether defendants' efforts to serve notice on plaintiff. Were constitutionally adequate. The new construction was never completed. Karkoukli's principals apparently believed the bank was paying taxes on both Lot 20 and Lot 6. No taxes were paid for Lot 6. Which was the address listed for future tax bills on the quit claim deed for Lot 6 that was filed with the County Register of Deeds. The box was only open for a few months. All of the mailed notices were returned as undeliverable by the postal service. There is no documentary evidence that Karkoukli's ever listed this address in the County records. Karkoukli's also accurately states that the home address was listed on several corporate filings made with the State. Karkoukli's argues that the State's possession of these documents demonstrates the ease with which the County could have obtained the additional address. Karkoukli also argues that his address could have been obtained from Walter Bedell. The address listed on the subpoenas was the home address where Mr.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="56"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/DFBE33482E8C5FA5882572910008EA61/$file/0510547.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Circuit Judge: Kenneth Kelley's home computer was searched for images of child pornography pursuant to a warrant based on information discovered during two unrelated computer searches for child pornography. He moved to suppress evidence obtained in the search after he was indicted for possessing child pornography in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2252A(a) (5)(B). The district court found that probable cause was not established by proof of receipt of e mails absent direct evidence about those who had sent them. Arguing that the district court improperly applied a bright line rule for what is required to establish probable cause in a case involving possession of child pornography. Which it submits is UNITED STATES v. There is a reasonable inference from facts set out in the affidavit that Kelley was not an accidental recipient of emails with attachments containing illicit child pornography. As we conclude that it was fairly probable that child pornography Kelley willingly received would be found on his computer.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="56"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200015133.OPN.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
KAHN CLERK This is an appeal of the district court's order unsealing documents previously filed pursuant to a protective order entered by stipulation of the parties. Inc.'s negligent design and manufacture of the tires on Daniel's Ford Explorer were the proximate cause of his death.1 At the beginning of the litigation. Postpones the necessary showing of
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="56"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/ABD6A99B4FC2C05C88256DF00000F5D7/$file/0235399.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Circuit Judge: The issue in this case is: what showing of pretext must a plaintiff in a retaliation suit make in order to overcome a defendant's motion for summary judgment. She was unable to demonstrate that Marathon's nondiscriminatory reasons for terminating her were a pretext for retaliation. Stegall alleges that she was fired from KORD. Facts Lynda Stegall was employed by Citadel Broadcasting Company (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="56"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//aug2001/00-15133.opn.html">CHICAGO TRIBUNE CO. V. BRIDGESTONE/FIRESTONE, INC. (8/28/2001, NO. 00-15133)<BR></A><BR>
Circuit Judges.</SPAN></P> <P><SPAN STYLE=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="56"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/dc/opinions/94opinions/94-5171a.html">BROWN & WILLIAMSON V. WAXMAN HENRY A.<BR></A><BR>
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="56"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=02-1542.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
P.C.</SPAN> were on brief. Associates</SPAN> were on brief. Plaintiff appellant Steven Rosenberg was terminated from his position as Director<A HREF=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="56"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/06a0170p-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The facts giving rise to this case are not in dispute. Pagan is a resident of the Village of Glendale. He was given a blue 1970 Mercury Cougar as partial payment for his work on a case and hoped to sell it for its $3. A Village police officer noted the sign and informed Pagan that it was illegal pursuant to Village ordinance § 76.06 (hereinafter
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="56"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/2BA74308F4A4A6B0882573130055EBFC/$file/0517027.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Were on the brief. Circuit Judge: We are asked. Whether the Anti terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act is unconstitutional. Numerous news reports were written on the crime. Crater and Robinson were tried for robbery. Robinson was convicted on all counts. After learning that Crater was reluctant to accept this deal. Finding no evidence that the state judge harbored
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="56"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.villanova.edu/locator/3d/Sept2002/022839u.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The government is content with the status quo. We have jurisdiction over a final order denying access to court records or proceedings under 28 U.S.C. 1291. We will reverse the order of the District Court and release the 5K letter in its entirety. I. Inasmuch as there is nothing of precedential value in our decision here. We write mainly for the District Court and the parties who are familiar with both the facts and procedural history of this case. It is unnecessary to recount either in detail. It is sufficient background to relate that Chang pleaded guilty to five counts related to making illegal contributions to Senator Torricelli. Sentencing for Chang was scheduled for May 23. Chang's sentencing memorandum was date stamped by the Clerk of the District Court's Office indicating that it was
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="56"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/1998/03/96-3197.htm">96-3197 -- LYTLE V. CITY OF HAYSVILLE KANSAS -- 03/11/1998<BR></A><BR>
Lytle was employed as a police officer by the City of Haysville. When he was discharged after alleging that fellow Haysville officers committed second degree murder by failing to render emergency aid to the victim of a police shooting. Because the important factual issues in this case are in reality undisputed and because the district court's decision involves questions of law under the appropriate balancing tests. We believe that this case is suited for summary judgment. The officers had received instruction in cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) as part of their law enforcement training and had learned that they should not move or perform CPR on critically injured persons who are still breathing. Wilson was. Where he was pronounced dead a short time later. <p> Approximately an hour after the shooting. Wilson was. Berg was demanding a grand jury investigation of the shooting and threatening to sue the City. Lytle explained that it was his wife who had first contacted Mr. Which was interview Mrs. He was going to die anyway.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="56"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/july97/93-5317.man.html">FREUND V. BUTTERWORTH<BR></A><BR>
This document was created from RTF source by rtftohtml version 2.7.5 > <title>Freund v. The State did not have a strong case against the petitioner: all physical evidence pointed to the co defendant. The only testimony directly identifying the petitioner as the murderer was that of a witness with serious credibility problems. Information that could have been used against him in a blameshifting defense for the petitioner. Would have made such disclosure unethical.<p> Compounding this conflict were allegations by the opposing defendant in open court that his relationship with the law firm ran deeper than that of attorney and client. If the law firm chose to present a defense of the petitioner that was antagonistic to their former client. The petitioner was convicted of first degree murder. Is now serving a life sentence. The other defendant pled guilty to second degree murder and is now a free man.<p> More disturbing to this court than the unethical behavior of the lawyers who represented the petitioner is the fact that this case has made its way to our docket.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="56"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/04a0268p-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Williams's appeal is now before the court. After receiving word via walkie talkie that the situation was secure. Who were roommates. Jessica answered the door and told Wynn that Madison was not home and Howard was asleep. Went back in
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="56"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/987002A.P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Senior Judge Butzner wrote a dissenting opinion. *Judge Murnaghan heard oral argument in this case but died prior to the time the decision was filed. 2 BELL v. Bell was convicted by a jury in North Carolina of fifty eight counts of sexual misconduct comprised of eight counts of first degree rape. Because Bell's petition for writ of habeas corpus was filed after the April 24. 1602 (2000). 2 The record indicates that twenty seven additional counts were dismissed during the course of the trial. 1 BELL v. When Wendy was awakened on a Saturday morning by Bell. Wendy was twelve years old and in the sixth grade. Bell was fiftyfive years old. The threat was effective. While his wife was sleeping or at work. Both of whom lived nearby and were friends of Wendy. Toni also testified that she was present at Bell's home on one occasion when he sexually molested Wendy. Toni was eleven years old when the abuse began. Bell's wife was cooking dinner and Vicki. Vicki was twelve years old. JARVIS hoping Bell would leave Wendy alone if Vicki was present.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="56"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/022461.P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Alleging that the PTO's 2002 advertising campaign to alert the public about
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="56"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//june2001/00-14272.man.html">LAMBERT V. FULTON COUNTY (6/6/2001, NO. 00-14272)<BR></A><BR>
000 compensatory damages on their separate Title VII claims against Fulton County asserting that disparate discipline was administered to them by Fulton County because they are white. Whether they were entitled to qualified immunity and whether the district court erred in denying their motions for judgment as a matter of law on the punitive damages claims or. Because there was sufficient evidence to support the several jury verdicts. Because Regus and Cooper were not entitled to qualified immunity. Factual Background</CENTER> </SPAN></P> <P><SPAN STYLE=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="56"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/001570.U.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Based upon a determination that the allegedly defamatory statement was an opinion that relied on readily available facts and therefore was not actionable. I. Agora is a Maryland company that publishes a monthly investment magazine called Taipan. Which is
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="56"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/aug2001/00-15133.opn.html">CHICAGO TRIBUNE CO. V. BRIDGESTONE/FIRESTONE, INC. (8/28/2001, NO. 00-15133)<BR></A><BR>
Circuit Judges.</SPAN></P> <P><SPAN STYLE=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="56"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/op/02/02-4323.PDF">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Tapes showing undressed players were compiled. The sellers either defaulted or were dismissed when they could not be located or served. The only remaining defendants are the informational intermediaries large corporations. The solvent defendants are GTE Corp. and Genuity Inc. (formerly known as GTE Internetworking). Both of which are subsidiaries of Verizon Communications. After the judgment became final with the resolution or dismissal of all claims against all other defendants the defaulting defendants were ordered to pay more than $500 million. Though there is little prospect of collection plaintiffs filed this appeal in order to continue their pursuit of the deep pockets. This defect in the removal process could have justified a remand. Because 30 days passed without protest and the problem does not imperil subject matter jurisdiction the case is in federal court to stay. Is dismissal under Fed. Yet the reason behind the district court's ruling is not failure to state a claim. Perhaps because the decision could have been recast as a judgment on the pleadings under Rule 12(c).
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="56"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/525C68CB19D94ECB88256E2900711056/$file/0255164.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Roe was unmasked when one of his supervisors discovered the videos online and recognized Roe's picture. Non work related activities were protected by the First Amendment and could not be grounds for terminating his employment. I. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND2 Roe was employed as a City of San Diego police officer for more than seven years. He was fired after the San Diego Roe is proceeding under a pseudonym pursuant to a district court order granting him permission to do so. 2 Because this case comes before the court on appeal from a dismissal pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). CITY OF SAN DIEGO Police Department discovered that he was selling sexually explicit. The uniform was offered for sale by a person with the eBay username
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="56"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/06/06/053955P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The Star Tribune Company (Tribune) and the Minnesota Newspaper Guild Typographical Union (Guild) are parties to a collective bargaining agreement (CBA) which covers employees in the news and editorial departments of the Tribune's Minneapolis newspaper and identifies the type of work reserved for union members. The Guild is the authorized bargaining representative for employees in the news and editorial departments (covered employees) of the Tribune. The Guild and the Tribune entered into a CBA in October 2003 which is effective through July 2008. It also states that it is
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="56"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/5769D6BA28E3AC48882572B80054B982/$file/0510547.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Is hereby amended as follows: the first paragraph of section III beginning at slip op. 2293 is hereby amended to read:
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="56"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//july97/93-5317.man.html">FREUND V. BUTTERWORTH<BR></A><BR>
This document was created from RTF source by rtftohtml version 2.7.5 > <title>Freund v. The State did not have a strong case against the petitioner: all physical evidence pointed to the co defendant. The only testimony directly identifying the petitioner as the murderer was that of a witness with serious credibility problems. Information that could have been used against him in a blameshifting defense for the petitioner. Would have made such disclosure unethical.<p> Compounding this conflict were allegations by the opposing defendant in open court that his relationship with the law firm ran deeper than that of attorney and client. If the law firm chose to present a defense of the petitioner that was antagonistic to their former client. The petitioner was convicted of first degree murder. Is now serving a life sentence. The other defendant pled guilty to second degree murder and is now a free man.<p> More disturbing to this court than the unethical behavior of the lawyers who represented the petitioner is the fact that this case has made its way to our docket.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="56"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:8080/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcT1BOXDA1LTI2MzktY3YgdyBkaXNzZW50LnBkZg==/05-2639-cv%20w%20dissent.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
It is indeed questionable whether. The plaintiff could have obtained effective judicial review of the validity of the government's proposed subpoena of the plaintiff's phone records without it. Could obtain records that identify journalists' confidential sources in gross and virtually at will. It is difficult to see in whose best interests such a regime would operate. For the question at the heart of this appeal is not so much whether there is protection for the identity of reporters' sources. Or even what that protection is. How any such protection is overcome. United States Department of Justice regulations have set forth a departmental policy designed to protect the legitimate needs of the news media in the context of criminal investigations and prosecutions. The Department of Justice guidelines are broadly worded. This policy statement is thus intended to provide protection for the news media from forms of compulsory process. [before a subpoena is served on a member of the media. That the information sought is essential to a successful investigation particularly with reference to directly establishing guilt or innocence.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="56"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:8080/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcT1BOXDA1LTI2MzkgZGlzc2VudCB3IEVycmF0YS5wZGY=/05-2639%20dissent%20w%20Errata.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
It is indeed questionable whether. The plaintiff could have obtained effective judicial review of the validity of the government's proposed subpoena of the plaintiff's phone records without it. Could obtain records that identify journalists' confidential sources in gross and virtually at will. It is difficult to see in whose best interests such a regime would operate. For the question at the heart of this appeal is not so much whether there is protection for the identity of reporters' sources. Or even what that protection is. How any such protection is overcome. United States Department of Justice regulations have set forth a departmental policy designed to protect the legitimate needs of the news media in the context of criminal investigations and prosecutions. The Department of Justice guidelines are broadly worded. This policy statement is thus intended to provide protection for the news media from forms of compulsory process. [before a subpoena is served on a member of the media. That the information sought is essential to a successful investigation particularly with reference to directly establishing guilt or innocence.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="56"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/971358.U.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Plaintiff is a journalist who works in the print and television media. Defendant is the Director of the Public Affairs Division of the Baltimore City Police Department. Is responsible for the dissemination of information from the Department to the media. Plaintiff alleges that the defendant violated her constitutional rights by denying her access to Department information on the same terms that it was made available to other members of the news media. Snyder aired a story for WBAL TV that alleged that the Department might have attempted to cover up a prominent politician's connection to a young murder victim. 2 that he was tired of responding to Snyder's weekend pages. Stated that he claimed it was an off the record comment to another reporter (apparently at the assignment desk of WBAL TV). Then alleged that the other reporter had confirmed that the comment was not. Ringgold also asserted in the letter that Snyder was continuing to abuse the paging system by paging PIOs needlessly on weekends.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="56"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/june2001/00-14272.man.html">LAMBERT V. FULTON COUNTY (6/6/2001, NO. 00-14272)<BR></A><BR>
000 compensatory damages on their separate Title VII claims against Fulton County asserting that disparate discipline was administered to them by Fulton County because they are white. Whether they were entitled to qualified immunity and whether the district court erred in denying their motions for judgment as a matter of law on the punitive damages claims or. Because there was sufficient evidence to support the several jury verdicts. Because Regus and Cooper were not entitled to qualified immunity. Factual Background</CENTER> </SPAN></P> <P><SPAN STYLE=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="56"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/6BEA0A1BA36F0D2A88256C84000643EA/$file/0056923.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The lyrics and video of Michael's newly released song Outside.1 The action was dismissed with prejudice for failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. Was working with his partner in Will Rogers Park in Beverly Hills due to complaints of lewd acts taking place in the men's restroom. Is a well known pop singer and song writer. 1 6 RODRIGUEZ v. He was fined and placed on probation. Michael claimed that Rodriguez had induced him to engage in the lewd act for which he was arrested by first exposing himself to and masturbating2 in front of him.3 Rodriguez contends that these statements are slanderous per se under California Civil Code § 46 because they accuse him of committing the crime of engaging 2 While most of Michael's statements claimed that Rodriguez had
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="56"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/E5127BFB9AC6CBC288256E1200826E11/$file/0235399.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
2003 is modified to read as follows: Although Marathon objects to Peterson's deposition testimony on the grounds that it is inadmissible hearsay. As follows:
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="54"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=01-1648.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
<SPAN STYLE=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="54"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/962544.P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The table displays are set up and stocked entirely by private citizens who are not affiliated in any way with the schools. No one is allowed to enter classrooms to announce the availability of the religious or political material. No school announcement or assembly is allowed to mark the availability of the Bibles or any other religious or political material. School principals are charged with ensuring strict compliance with these guidelines. Westfall or school activity personnel
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="54"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.villanova.edu/locator/3d/Dec2003/022507p.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Each of the deaths was traceable to Chronic Beryllium Disease (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="54"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/981888.U.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. That was
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="54"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/1999/06/98-1323.htm">98-1323 -- U.S. V. WILSON -- 06/29/1999<BR></A><BR>
Circuit Judge. <p> <hr align=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="54"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/01/02/001202P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Blom was charged in federal court with being a felon in possession of firearms in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(g)(1) and 924(e)(1). He was charged in state court with the kidnapping and murder of Poirier. Though Moose Lake is in northeastern Minnesota. Much of the media coverage was statewide. His federal indictment on July 8 was well publicized. Was charged with murder and kidnapping in state court. Rests exclusively on the quantum of publicity that his State and Federal Court charges have received. [Blom's] argument is indistinguishable from that presented to the Supreme Court. Which the Court determined was insufficient to establish a denial of due process. Whose credibility the jurors chosen in this case will presumably have an opportunity to evaluate for themselves.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="54"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/1998/04/97-3031.htm">97-3031 -- CAPITAL CITIES/ABC INC. V. RATCLIFF -- 04/17/1998<BR></A><BR>
The Carriers' action was transferred to the District of Kansas. Where it was consolidated with the Star's declaratory judgment action. At issue is whether the Carriers are eligible to receive benefits under the Star's four ERISA plans. We affirm the district court's conclusion that they are not.<a href=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="54"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/984907.P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="54"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=94-1490.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Is amended as follows: The second sentence of the first full paragraph on page 25 should be deleted. The following two sentences should be inserted in its place: And the only other evidence of a representation regarding commercialization levels at KOVR introduced by Anchor at the second trial was the so called July/August 1988 day part summary. The July/August 1988 day part summary allegedly misrepresented that KOVR was undercommercialized in July and August 1988 and understated commercial generated income during this same period. Goldenberg & Muri were on brief for appellants. Were on brief for defendants appellees Narragansett Capital. It will be reiterated here only to the extent necessary to resolve the issues before us. Anchor was awarded the station after submitting the high bid at a closed auction held in late September 1988. The sale price eventually agreed upon by the parties was $162 million. The deal was structured as a merger of an Anchor subsidiary into the corporate owner of KOVR. The terms of the 2 2 merger were memorialized in a merger agreement (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="54"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.fedcir.gov/opinions/05-1008.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
With him on the brief were Jonathan T. On the brief were Robert M. 094 (the '094 patent) is invalid under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b). Thus is not a party to the present appeal. Broadcast and IO Research will collectively be referred to as
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="54"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=97-2376.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Louison and Merrick and Louison were on brief. This appeal presents a problematic First Amendment question as to whether the plaintiff was a
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="54"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/op/03/03-2092.PDF">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
This is only if the prisoner's claim was adjudicated by the state court
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="54"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.fedcir.gov/opinions/04-1293.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
With him on the brief was Robert L.Vogel. The complaint further alleged that Pedre is a New York corporation with its main office in New York City. That the district court had venue because Pedre
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="54"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/002260.P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Were properly dismissed. Trulock was demoted within the DOE. He was ultimately forced out in 1999. Which published an excerpt in an edition that was circulated in early July of 2000. Although the complaint states that they were armed. Conrad was able to receive two incoming telephone calls. One of which was from Trulock. The complaint implies that Conrad was not at liberty to leave the conference room. To place a call in private) or that the agents told her that she was not free to terminate the interview and leave. The complaint does not allege that the agents claimed to have a search warrant. That she was fearful. Where Trulock was waiting. Was also necessary. When the search was over. Was insufficient to permit the search of Trulock's private computer files. Each Defendant also argued that he was entitled to qualified immunity on both counts. Were entitled to qualified immunity. The complaint presents no indications that the actions by the defendants were other than a good faith effort to determine whether classified information was being unlawfully possessed.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="54"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//oct99/98-4153.man.html">FREHLING ENTERPRISES V. INT'L SELECT GROUP (10/18/1999, NO. 98-4153)<BR></A><BR>
INTRODUCTION</CENTER> </P> <P> This is a servicemark infringement case. Inc. (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="54"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/oct99/98-4153.man.html">FREHLING ENTERPRISES V. INT'L SELECT GROUP (10/18/1999, NO. 98-4153)<BR></A><BR>
INTRODUCTION</CENTER> </P> <P> This is a servicemark infringement case. Inc. (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="54"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200411150.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Because the statute is a content based restriction which chills speech that
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="54"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/A825BD967D7D2BA788256C7E00155710/$file/0115052.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
We have subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. P. 54(b) provides:
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="54"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/fdocs/docs.fwx?submit=showbr&shofile=04-2173_030.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
You filed an application for a credit card and you are now eligible to receive your MasterCard.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="54"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/dec2002/02-12655.opn.html">UNITED STATES V. WHITESELL (12/17/2002, NO. 02-12655)<BR></A><BR>
He was sentenced to five years' imprisonment.</SPAN><SPAN STYLE=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="54"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:8080/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcT1BOXDA0LTY2OTItYWdfb3BuLnBkZg==/04-6692-ag_opn.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
That is intended to protect aquatic organisms from being harmed or killed by cooling water intake structures at large. While we conclude that certain aspects of the rule are based on a reasonable interpretation of the Clean Water Act and supported by substantial evidence in the administrative record. Several aspects of the rule are not consistent with the statute. Are not supported by sufficient evidence. Or were not properly subject to notice and comment. We therefore grant in part and deny in part the petitions for review and dismiss in part one aspect of the petitions for lack of jurisdiction because there is no final agency action to review. Circuit Judge: This is a case about fish and other aquatic organisms. 1 that is intended to protect fish. Concluding that certain aspects of the EPA's rule are based on a reasonable interpretation of the Act and supported by substantial evidence in the administrative record. Remanding several aspects of the rule because they are inadequately explained or inconsistent with the statute.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="54"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/06b0001p-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
I. ISSUE ON APPEAL The issue presented is whether the claims of Petitioning Creditors are subject to bona fide disputes. An order dismissing an involuntary petition is a final order that may be appealed by right under 28 U.S.C. § 158(a)(1). An order granting involuntary bankruptcy relief is a final order. Findings of fact are reviewed under the clearly erroneous standard.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="54"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200303/01-1392a.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="54"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/041521np.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
We have jurisdiction pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1252(a). 2 will deny the petition. I. We will limit our factual discussion to those events relevant to our decision. Tahiraj was born in Albania in 1970. Tahiraj was struck by a government agent and lost consciousness. He testified that he was arrested and brought to a police station. Where he was interrogated and mistreated by both a police officer and a member of the Sigurimi. Were riding in a caravan of cars behind a police escort when the caravan was attacked by machine gun fire and Delibashi was shot. Tahiraj was arrested by the police and allegedly beaten. Tahiraj was again arrested by police on October 16. He claimed that on this occasion he was beaten and held along with other individuals who. Claiming that his life was in danger and that he would be killed if he returned. In which the most careful consideration was given to the issues before him. The IJ stated that while he was not inclined to make an adverse credibility finding. He was concerned with Tahiraj's failure to corroborate certain aspects of his testimony.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="54"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/06a0235n-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Because the resolution of Puertas's constitutional claims by the state courts was not contrary to. Officers and experts testified at trial that the dogs were most likely alerting to a lingering odor from drugs that recently had been removed from the safes. While that appeal was pending. It concludes that the allegations of public corruption in connection with the Puertas investigation were unfounded. We may grant a habeas petition if the state court's adjudication of the claim
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="54"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/dc/opinions/00opinions/00-1144a.html">ASSOCIATION OF COMMUNICATIONS ENTERPRISES V. FCC<BR></A><BR>
Hunter argued the cause for petitioner.<span style=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="54"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/10D55BB266D4B9F8882571E10000B7AA/$file/0555695.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
It asserts that the claim on which relief was granted was unexhausted and that the state court's rejection of 10684 REYNOSO v. GIURBINO the claim was reasonable. We conclude that Reynoso's claim was properly exhausted and that. Jyotsna Prajapati was shot once in the head and died from her wounds shortly afterwards. Prajapati was working alone behind the counter of the Top Produce Market. Hinojosa was questioned at Centinela State Prison where he was serving a sentence for burglary. Believed that the case was
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="54"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/06a0110n-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Because the resolution of Puertas's constitutional claims by the state courts was not contrary to. Officers and experts testified at trial that the dogs were most likely alerting to a lingering odor from drugs that recently had been removed from the safes. While that appeal was pending. It concludes that the allegations of public corruption in connection with the Puertas investigation were unfounded. We may grant a habeas petition if the state court's adjudication of the claim
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="54"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/04a0178p-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Bowker was arrested on August 29. Bowker was charged UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. Bowker filed several pretrial motions which are the subject of this appeal a pro se motion to represent himself. The emails were sent from several different email addresses and purported to be from an individual variously identified as
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="54"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/05a0095n-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
This is an appeal from the district court's dismissal of Plaintiff Cadle Company's case against Jan Schlichtmann for lack of personal jurisdiction. Is an Ohio based debt collector. Have been entangled in legal battles. Cadle sued Schlichtmann to enforce a security interest it claimed to have on the The Honorable Denise Page Hood.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="54"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.villanova.edu/locator/3d/Oct2001/002409.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
I. BACKGROUND Omega Engineering Corp. (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="54"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//dec2002/02-12655.opn.html">UNITED STATES V. WHITESELL (12/17/2002, NO. 02-12655)<BR></A><BR>
He was sentenced to five years' imprisonment.</SPAN><SPAN STYLE=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="52"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/591DAF74D57F7E4C88256E5A00707CC3/$file/0055122.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Circuit Judge: It has been said that bad credit is like a
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="52"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca10.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=05-3266.wpd">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Katie Lane and Sarah Rice are former editors of the Kansas State Collegian (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="52"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/dc/opinions/96opinions/96-1001a.html">DIRECTV INC V. FCC<BR></A><BR>
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="52"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/05a0729n-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
(2) his trial should have been transferred or the jury sequestered due to extensive media coverage of the crimes with which he was charged. BACKGROUND The facts are taken from the evidence presented at trial and are viewed in the light most favorable to the government. No. 04 5780 Goins and Justin Jones first met when the two were patients in the psychiatric ward of an army hospital at Fort Benning. Both men had gone AWOL and thought they were likely to be discharged from service in the army. Goins suggested that the two could rob a bank in Virginia once they were discharged. The loan was made in anticipation of a tax refund of the same amount. In testimony Goins contends should have been excluded. Goins represented that he was an undercover police officer investigating drug activity. Jones followed Goins's lead and pretended that he too was an undercover officer. Goins told Woltz he suspected the cash was drug money but told Woltz he could have the money back if his supervisor (Woltz worked at a nearby restaurant) confirmed it was actually tip money or wages.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="52"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//july2001/99-14391.man.html">NAJJAR V. ASHCROFT (7/18/2001, NO. 99-14391)<BR></A><BR>
BACKGROUND</CENTER> </SPAN></P> <P><SPAN STYLE=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="52"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.villanova.edu/locator/3d/Jan2002/011251.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Several images of the latter were found. Zimmerman was indicted for possession of child pornography in violation of 18 U.S.C. His suppression motion was denied. Preserving his right to appeal the issue of whether the search warrant that produced the damning evidence was supported by probable cause. One video clip of adult pornography was in Zimmerman's home (or at least that Zimmerman had accessed it via the Internet from his home). That information was stale. We agree with Zimmerman that there was no probable cause to search for pornography child or adult in his home. Will reverse the denial of the suppression motion and vacate the judgment of conviction and sentence.1 1. David Zimmerman was a high school teacher and basketball coach in McCandless Township. Zimmerman was charged in the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County. The investigation continued after Zimmerman was charged. Had shown him
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="52"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/fdocs/docs.fwx?submit=showbr&shofile=05-3995_016.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Plaintiffs are charities that Indiana's Telephone Privacy Act (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="52"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/2E5F3A673466BE058825734D0052AF1C/$file/0399010.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The jury unanimously returned a recommendation of a sentence of death as to each of the two victims who were murdered. They were picked up by a trucker who took them part of the way. It is a 35 minute drive that the two made in Slim's pewter colored double cab Sierra GMC pickup truck. Denison was unable to assist her. That is the last time they were seen alive. Slim and Jane were in front. Her body was pulled onto the rear seat. Jane was put next to her. Slim's body was dragged out. Jane was ordered out of the truck and told by Mitchell
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="52"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/Sep1999/971944.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Seitz was a member of the original panel but died before the matter was decided. Asserts that its First and Fourteenth Amendment rights were violated by a township's refusal to allow videotaping of a meeting of the Township Planning Commission. We will affirm. The application was placed on the agenda for the September 25. Said he wanted a video record of all proceedings and Riley informed the Commission that he believed allowing videotaping was required by Pennsylvania's Sunshine Act. The court held the ban was not a violation of the First Amendment because it was a reasonable time. The court also determined that plaintiff 's request for injunctive relief was moot. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. III A The primary issue on appeal is whether there is a federal constitutional right to videotape public meetings of a township planning commission when other effective means of recording the proceedings are available.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="52"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/D06EED7E97A7520388256AC5005C2482/$file/0055122.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Circuit Judge: It has been said that bad credit is like a
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="52"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/dc/opinions/93opinions/93-1220a.html">COM EFFECTIVE CELL V. FCC<BR></A><BR>
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="52"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200312545.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Revives securities fraud actions that were time barred before the effective date of the SOA. Determining that the new limitations period revives actions that previously were time barred. A
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="52"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=91-1868.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Ramirez & Ramirez were on brief. Dominguez & Totti were on brief. The Executive Order is reproduced in an appendix to the district court's rescript. Each agency was directed
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="52"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/july2001/99-14391.man.html">NAJJAR V. ASHCROFT (7/18/2001, NO. 99-14391)<BR></A><BR>
BACKGROUND</CENTER> </SPAN></P> <P><SPAN STYLE=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="52"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca10.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=04-1385.wpd">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The case is. Appeals a jury (1) This order and judgment is not binding precedent. I. DTV is a direct broadcast satellite system. Which is programmed to allow a customer to access only those channels included in his or her subscription. Various pirate access devices have been developed that allow users to receive and unscramble DTV programming without a paid subscription. Crespin argues that he was authorized by DTV. In the absence of proof that he was unauthorized to receive DTV's transmissions. Crespin claims that the district court had no jurisdiction over him and that DTV is not a
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="52"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/200006/99-1078a.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
With him on the briefs was Douglas W. With him on the brief were Linda R. Dai Ichi claims it need not deal with the Union because the Board improperly defined the bargaining unit for which it was certified and because the election of the Union as the employees' bargaining representative was invalid. We agree with Dai Ichi that the representation election was invalid. I. Background Dai Ichi operates a resort hotel located on the island of Saipan in the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Is lands (CNMI). By severely restricting the immigration of nonresi dents and by limiting the
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="51"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200516659.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The appellants (collectively
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="51"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="ftp://opinions.ca5.uscourts.gov/byDate/Jun2004/Jun22/03-50859.0.wpd.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. Two paragraphs of these agreements are at the center of the parties' dispute: IX. Other documents prepared by the Architect for this project are the instruments of the Architect's service for use solely with respect to this project and the Architect shall be deemed the author of these documents and shall retain all common law. Copy or cause to have copied. Except that the stated base architectural fee for one of the projects was $250. After all five projects were completed. In WHA sued several related Trammell Crow entities. refer to all the entities collectively as TCR. 3 1 We will designing The North Bend. Construction Documents for Trammell Crow Residential utilizing plans which are copyrighted property of Womack+Hampton Architects. An agreement was reached between Womack+Hampton Architects. Trammell Crow Residential and Chiles Architects allowing him to utilize our designs on that development for a Use Fee which is common in this industry.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="51"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/04a0133n-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The plaintiffs argue that: 1) they were discharged in retaliation for exercising their First Amendment rights. 2) the Mentor police rules are an unconstitutional prior restraint on speech. Baker were police officers for the City of Mentor and active officers in the police union. Amiott's decision to recommend the discharge of the officers was based. Summary judgment is appropriate when
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="51"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/200106/00-1144a.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
With him on the briefs was Catherine M. With him on the brief were Christopher J. Requires that an incumbent local exchange carrier (incumbent or ILEC)
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="51"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="ftp://opinions.ca5.uscourts.gov/unpub/02/02-41592.0.wpd.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The Court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="51"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/07a0277n-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
That the immigration judge's evidentiary rulings were justified. That no evidence compels a conclusion that country conditions in Albania are such that Thanasi could establish a well founded fear of future No. 05 4490 Thanasi v. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND Thanasi is an Albanian national who entered this country on a visitor's visa in 2001 and overstayed the period authorized by the visa. Thanasi was removed from the prestigious Parliament
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="51"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=98-2160.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
LLP were on brief for appellees. Was founded by Ronald Pasqualino in 1990. As Safety Products was virtually insolvent. The trademark application was actively opposed by plaintiff appellee Danjaq. Ronald Pasqualino was not mentioned in the Agreement. Which was executed by Angelo as president of Safety Products. Subject to its reopening in the event the settlement was not consummated within sixty days. Danjaq contended that Ronald though neither a named party nor a signatory to the Settlement Agreement was so
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="51"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/aug2002/01-14305.opn.html">UNITED STATES V. BOWMAN (8/20/2002, NO. 01-14305)<BR></A><BR>
Was convicted of racketeering. He was sentenced to life in prison. The Outlaws Motorcycle Club</EM></SPAN></P> <P><SPAN STYLE=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="51"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/98/02/963270P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
She was convicted of mail fraud for submitting a false Small Business Administration Form 1031 in connection with the loan. Which stated that the purpose of the loan was for operating expenses of Master Marketing. When it was known that the proceeds would not be so used. Of aiding and abetting in making a false statement for the purpose of influencing the actions of Capital Management Services by falsely representing that the purpose of the loan was to provide operating capital for Master Marketing. In violation of 18 U.S.C.A. § 1014 (West Supp. 1997) (Count 16).1 Susan McDougal argues that her convictions should be reversed because: (1) there was insufficient evidence to convict her. (2) coconspirator hearsay statements were admitted and the district court2 failed to grant a mistrial after dismissal of the conspiracy charges. Finally (7) the trial was tainted by cumulative error. Trial testimony was that David Hale was president of Capital Management Services. James McDougal was the Chairman of the Board of Madison Guaranty Savings and Loan.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="51"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/50F67AA133DE5D8088256D280073E440/$file/0056043.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Are withdrawn and replaced by the amended opinion. The full court was advised of the petition for rehearing en banc. A majority of the nonrecused active judges failed to vote in favor of en banc rehearing.* The petition for rehearing en banc is denied. *Judge Rawlinson was recused. 6460 SUZUKI MOTOR CORP. v. What makes CU's ratings particularly useful is the thorough explanation of the testing procedures employed. Is no exception. The explanation is not written for morons. It is geared to an intelligent. Yet the careful reader will not fail to understand the central facts that undergird Suzuki's claim in this lawsuit. This is the death of consumer ratings: It will be impossible to issue a meaningful consumer review that a band of determined lawyers can't pick apart in front of a SUZUKI MOTOR CORP. v. The ultimate losers will be American consumers denied access to independent information about the safety and usefulness of products they buy with their hard earned dollars. The majority's analysis is tainted throughout by its failure to articulate.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="51"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=02-2309.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Either pays the subsidy to the service provider directly (if the approved schools have not already paid in full) or reimburses the schools for part of the cost (if the projects have been approved and the schools have paid the service provider for the work). Who in turn must pass the funds through to the school.</SPAN> <P><SPAN STYLE=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="51"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/291947A4B3B3EFF588256C7E00151B67/$file/0056141.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Their claims are not at issue here. 1 O'CONNOR v. Establishes a federal standard that governs when delayed discovery of a plaintiff's claims will toll the statute of limitations. Whether CERCLA applies here turns on whether CERCLA's federal standard is more generous than California law in tolling California's one year statute of limitations. Which postpones the start of the limitations period until a plaintiff suspects or should have suspected their claims. The state and federal standards were the same. The district court held that Plaintiffs' claims were untimely because. Plaintiffs suspected or should have suspected the cause of their illnesses more than a year before they filed their claims. We hold that (1) the district court erred in concluding that the federal and California standards are the same. Summary judgment was 8 O'CONNOR v. BOEING NORTH AMERICAN improper because there are genuine issues of material fact regarding whether Plaintiffs knew or should have known of their claims within the limitations period.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="51"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=01-2032.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Franco</SPAN> were on brief. Were on brief. The district court granted the remaining defendants' motion for summary judgment on all of the claims under federal law.<A HREF=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="51"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/974011.U.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
No. 97 4011 Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. The Federal Bureau of Investigation was notified by an America OnLine1 customer and police officer. Were electronically transmitted to undercover agents by BIG MIKE 8. A small quantity of narcotics. 3 After extensive 1 America OnLine is a commercial computer service and online access provider. 2 The court uses the adjective
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="51"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/051746p.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
We will grant the petition. 2 I. A. The current situation in Cote d'Ivoire was born from the increasingly divisive politics that arose following the death of its first president. Houphouet Boigny was from the southern part of Cote d'Ivoire. Which is religiously. The population of the South is predominantly Christian and animist. Is comprised of various ethnic groups. French is the primary language. The northern part of the country is predominantly Muslim in religion and Dioula and Senoufo in ethnicity. Dioula is the primary language. They seized upon the perception that northern Ivoirians have closer ethnic. Was one of several opposition parties that emerged to rally against the discrimination against northerners. Was stopped from standing in the presidential elections after doubts were raised about his nationality. Which was perceived as another instance of discrimination and human rights abuses against northerners. There was widespread suspicion. That the RDR was instrumental in the coup. Numerous human rights violations are alleged to have been committed in the suppression of the riots and rebellion.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="51"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/0168FFB46E51AC548825718F00493302/$file/0356621.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Both these ordinances and Santa Monica's administrative interpretation of them have changed substantially. Appellants' persistent urging and Santa Monica's willingness to change its regulations have together produced a transformation in the applicable permitting scheme that to the credit of all par SANTA MONICA FOOD v. We hold that Santa Monica's Community Events Ordinance is. Is not constitutionally sound and cannot be enforced. The facial challenges to other ordinances either are moot or fail on the merits. We are not to be understood as having reviewed or approved aspects of the ordinances or implementing regulations not here challenged. We have endeavored throughout to be quite specific about the limited nature of the challenges to which we respond. 2 Santa Monica has requested that we take judicial notice of six documents: Staff Report. Santa Monica submits that each document is a certified public record. The first four documents are on file with the City Clerk of the City of Santa Monica. The remainder can be accessed at Santa Monica's official website found at www.santa monica.org/ccs/events and are on file with the Open Space Management Division of the Community and Cultural Services Department of the City of Santa Monica.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="51"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2002/02/01-6097.htm">01-6097 -- U.S. V. ANGEVINE -- 02/22/2002<BR></A><BR>
This computer was networked with other University computers and in turn was linked to computers around the world via the Internet. Professor Angevine also submitted a motion arguing the search warrant used to seize the computer was invalid because police recklessly omitted material information in their application affidavit. The district court held a <em>Franks</em> hearing was unnecessary since police did not need a search warrant to seize the University computer. The policy maintains
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="51"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="ftp://opinions.ca5.uscourts.gov/byDate/Jun2004/Jun22/03-50549.0.wpd.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. Two paragraphs of these agreements are at the center of the parties' dispute: IX. Other documents prepared by the Architect for this project are the instruments of the Architect's service for use solely with respect to this project and the Architect shall be deemed the author of these documents and shall retain all common law. Copy or cause to have copied. Except that the stated base architectural fee for one of the projects was $250. After all five projects were completed. In WHA sued several related Trammell Crow entities. refer to all the entities collectively as TCR. 3 1 We will designing The North Bend. Construction Documents for Trammell Crow Residential utilizing plans which are copyrighted property of Womack+Hampton Architects. An agreement was reached between Womack+Hampton Architects. Trammell Crow Residential and Chiles Architects allowing him to utilize our designs on that development for a Use Fee which is common in this industry.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="51"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="ftp://opinions.ca5.uscourts.gov/unpub/03/03-50549.0.wpd.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. Two paragraphs of these agreements are at the center of the parties' dispute: IX. Other documents prepared by the Architect for this project are the instruments of the Architect's service for use solely with respect to this project and the Architect shall be deemed the author of these documents and shall retain all common law. Copy or cause to have copied. Except that the stated base architectural fee for one of the projects was $250. After all five projects were completed. In WHA sued several related Trammell Crow entities. refer to all the entities collectively as TCR. 3 1 We will designing The North Bend. Construction Documents for Trammell Crow Residential utilizing plans which are copyrighted property of Womack+Hampton Architects. An agreement was reached between Womack+Hampton Architects. Trammell Crow Residential and Chiles Architects allowing him to utilize our designs on that development for a Use Fee which is common in this industry.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="51"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="ftp://opinions.ca5.uscourts.gov/unpub/03/03-50859.0.wpd.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. Two paragraphs of these agreements are at the center of the parties' dispute: IX. Other documents prepared by the Architect for this project are the instruments of the Architect's service for use solely with respect to this project and the Architect shall be deemed the author of these documents and shall retain all common law. Copy or cause to have copied. Except that the stated base architectural fee for one of the projects was $250. After all five projects were completed. In WHA sued several related Trammell Crow entities. refer to all the entities collectively as TCR. 3 1 We will designing The North Bend. Construction Documents for Trammell Crow Residential utilizing plans which are copyrighted property of Womack+Hampton Architects. An agreement was reached between Womack+Hampton Architects. Trammell Crow Residential and Chiles Architects allowing him to utilize our designs on that development for a Use Fee which is common in this industry.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="51"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//aug2002/01-14305.opn.html">UNITED STATES V. BOWMAN (8/20/2002, NO. 01-14305)<BR></A><BR>
Was convicted of racketeering. He was sentenced to life in prison. The Outlaws Motorcycle Club</EM></SPAN></P> <P><SPAN STYLE=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="51"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/994793.U.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
No. 99 4793 Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. I. Hambrick was arrested in his Albemarle County home following a search warrant executed by the Albemarle County Police and federal officials on July 10. Hambrick was a Captain in the Albemarle County Police Department. He was indicted for possession of child pornography. Who is a member of a regional task force against Internet crimes aimed at children. McLaughlin was on line on a chat room called
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="51"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/021153.U.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Lines 1 2 the phrase is corrected to read
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="51"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/05a0894n-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Cookeville Page 2 Shipley are entitled to qualified immunity. The Smoak family was pulled over on Interstate 40 by the Tennessee Highway Patrol under suspicion of committing armed robbery after a woman reported seeing money flying from their car. As the family of three was kneeling on the pavement. Officer Hall discharged his shotgun at Patton when he was approximately a foot away. The entire traffic stop was taped and the video gained international notoriety. The record is unclear whether this release was done with Hall's knowledge or consent. Made the redactions she felt were required by law. The Cookeville Police Department received an anonymous tip stating that the Animal Liberation Front was threatening to put a contract out on Hall's life. This threat was relayed to the Federal Bureau of Investigation. Social security number (although it was not identified as such). The segment was taped in Hall's attorney's office. The segment was broadcast on January 21st.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="51"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2000/12/99-1414.htm">99-1414 -- CITIZENS FOR RESPONSIBLE GOVERNMENT STATE POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE V. DAVIDSON -- 12/26/2000<BR></A><BR>
1 45 107 (Independent Expenditures).<a href=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="51"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200114305.opn.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Was convicted of racketeering. He was sentenced to life in prison. The Outlaws Motorcycle Club The Outlaws Motorcycle Club was founded at a bar just outside of Chicago in 1935. The United States is divided into five regions. Each other country is considered a region. These clubhouses are used for
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="51"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/fdocs/docs.fwx?submit=showbr&shofile=04-1713_037.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
On the basis of any of the theories the plaintiffs have presented to us. Some or all of their claims are entitled to go forward. It concluded that the federal statute of limitations applicable to the plaintiffs' claims was not tolled during the pendency of certain state class actions in the California courts. Which were necessarily based on state rather than federal antitrust law. Whether viewed as a question of the time when the plaintiffs reasonably could have discovered that Morgan had anything to do with their injuries or viewed as a question of equitable estoppel and fraudulent concealment. The facts taken in the light most favorable to the plaintiffs could support a finding that their suit was timely. That the plaintiffs' claims against Sumitomo and Global were correctly dismissed. We therefore limit our discussion of the facts (taken for present purposes in the light most favorable to plaintiffs) to those that are of particular relevance. In the underlying actions that were consolidated under the multidistrict litigation (MDL) statute.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="48"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="ftp://opinions.ca5.uscourts.gov/byDate/Sep2004/Sep24/04-30175.0.wpd.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The Court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. FACTS AND PROCEEDINGS Plaintiff was employed by Renaissance Media. Genella was fired on April 5. Charter claims Genella was fired as a result of the altercation. Genella alleges that he was terminated in retaliation for having informed Charter that his former supervisor. Genella claims that because Miller and Ford were friends. Genella argues that the notebook dispute was a mere pretext. The evidence is undisputed that Charter Communications. LLC was not the plaintiff's employer. LLC is not a proper party to this action. Summary judgment is proper if the movant demonstrates that there is no genuine issue of material fact and is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Whether Genella's claim under the Louisiana Whistleblower Statute was properly dismissed. Genella reported that Charter was a victim of Ford's unlawful actions. Was violated by [the defendant] and therefore he fails to state a claim under La.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="48"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/8A4AAE920612E51688256C390053E9FF/$file/0130303.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
We have jurisdiction under 18 U.S.C. § 1291. Bell's computers also contained the names and home addresses of dozens of IRS employees and messages indicating they were intended for
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="48"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//sept96/94-6668.opa.html">LITTLE V. BRELAND<BR></A><BR>
This document was created from RTF source by rtftohtml version 2.7.5 > <title>Little v. Visitors Corporation was a matter of public controversy thereby making Little a limited purpose public figure. The district court held that Little was a limited purpose public figure and was required to prove actual malice to prevail on his defamation claim. A limited purpose public figure is
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="48"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/dec99/98-2498.opn.html">MORTON'S MKT., INC. V. GUSTAFSON'S DAIRY, INC. (12/20/1999, NO. 98-2498)<BR></A><BR>
Inc. are retailers of milk. Civil action were reported in February 1988. The newspaper articles discussed the Dairies' agreements among themselves to rig bids for school milk and revealed that the federal government was also scrutinizing the industry. Undertake any investigation into whether the Dairies were also fixing the price of milk to retailers.</P> <P> During late 1987 and early 1988. Information regarding price fixing of wholesale milk prices was contained in each of these guilty pleas. Gustafson's was charged with price fixing in May of 1992. Contending that these actions are time barred by the Act's four year statute of limitations. 15 U.S.C. § 15(b). More than four years before these actions were filed in 1993. Plaintiffs also contended that the statute of limitations was tolled in this case by the Dairies' fraudulent concealment of their price fixing activities. We cannot know whether plaintiffs' actions are time barred unless we know when the statute began to run. We can determine whether and how it was tolled in this case and what impact that tolling has on the scope of plaintiffs' damages. </P> <P>A.<U> The Commencement of the Statute of Limitations </U></P> <P> Under the antitrust laws.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="48"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2002/06/01-1512a.htm">01-1512A -- FLEMING V. JEFERSON COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT R-1 -- 06/27/2002<BR></A><BR>
Circuit Judges. <p> <hr align=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="48"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200111197.opn.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Because the automated telephone contestant selection process was not conducted at a physical location. It was not a place of
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="48"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//dec99/98-2498.opn.html">MORTON'S MKT., INC. V. GUSTAFSON'S DAIRY, INC. (12/20/1999, NO. 98-2498)<BR></A><BR>
Inc. are retailers of milk. Civil action were reported in February 1988. The newspaper articles discussed the Dairies' agreements among themselves to rig bids for school milk and revealed that the federal government was also scrutinizing the industry. Undertake any investigation into whether the Dairies were also fixing the price of milk to retailers.</P> <P> During late 1987 and early 1988. Information regarding price fixing of wholesale milk prices was contained in each of these guilty pleas. Gustafson's was charged with price fixing in May of 1992. Contending that these actions are time barred by the Act's four year statute of limitations. 15 U.S.C. § 15(b). More than four years before these actions were filed in 1993. Plaintiffs also contended that the statute of limitations was tolled in this case by the Dairies' fraudulent concealment of their price fixing activities. We cannot know whether plaintiffs' actions are time barred unless we know when the statute began to run. We can determine whether and how it was tolled in this case and what impact that tolling has on the scope of plaintiffs' damages. </P> <P>A.<U> The Commencement of the Statute of Limitations </U></P> <P> Under the antitrust laws.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="48"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="ftp://opinions.ca5.uscourts.gov/unpub/04/04-30175.0.wpd.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The Court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. FACTS AND PROCEEDINGS Plaintiff was employed by Renaissance Media. Genella was fired on April 5. Charter claims Genella was fired as a result of the altercation. Genella alleges that he was terminated in retaliation for having informed Charter that his former supervisor. Genella claims that because Miller and Ford were friends. Genella argues that the notebook dispute was a mere pretext. The evidence is undisputed that Charter Communications. LLC was not the plaintiff's employer. LLC is not a proper party to this action. Summary judgment is proper if the movant demonstrates that there is no genuine issue of material fact and is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Whether Genella's claim under the Louisiana Whistleblower Statute was properly dismissed. Genella reported that Charter was a victim of Ford's unlawful actions. Was violated by [the defendant] and therefore he fails to state a claim under La.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="48"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/199908/97-3168a.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
With her on the brief were Wilma A. Defendant An dre Clark was found guilty of unlawful possession of a firearm by a convicted felon. He was sentenced to 90 months in prison on each count. He challenges his convictions on the following grounds: (1) that the evidence was insufficient to warrant conviction on any count. Clark also contends that he should only have been convicted once rather than twice for unlawfully possessing both a firearm and the ammunition with which it was loaded. We agree that defendant is correct. Police officers Otis McGinnis and Daymeion Harris stopped an automobile that was traveling over 40 miles per hour in a 25 miles per hour zone. Andre Clark was the driver and sole occupant of the car. The document was a cellular phone contract in the name of Paul Green. After a radio check disclosed that defendant did not have a valid license. He was placed under arrest for driving without a permit. The first place he looked was under the rear of the driver's seat. Clark also told the officers his name was Paul Green.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="48"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2002/06/01-1512.htm">01-1512 -- FLEMING V. JEFFERSON COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT -- 06/27/2002<BR></A><BR>
Holding that the District's guidelines governing a tile painting project at Columbine High School (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="48"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/054425p.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The Appellants are home and business owners who were issued criminal citations by the City of Bradford. 2 which have now been amended. Violate the First Amendment because they are impermissibly content based. Are in fact content neutral and permissible under the First Amendment based in part on our holding in Rappa v. We will affirm the holding of the District Court. Fred Pysher are residents of the City of Bradford. The properties at issue are Riel's residence. Riel's and Thompson's signs were handmade cardboard and plywood signs containing criticisms of City officials. Some of the signs included:
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="48"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/10circuit/nov96/95-8005.wpd.html">GARDETO V. MASON<BR></A><BR>
Gardetto claims that the district court committed reversible error by submitting the question of whether her speech was entitled to First Amendment protection to the jury rather than deciding the issue as a matter of law. Gardetto was responsible for developing programs designed to support and provide guidance to adult students. (4) her criticism of Mason for holding himself out as a
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="48"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/dc/opinions/95opinions/95-1047a.html">DAILY NEWS LOS V. NLRB<BR></A><BR>
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="48"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/65F252E2DE963B3588256D9D0069D9B5/$file/0035924.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
At issue in this case are two of the provisions contained in that initiative. The district court's factual findings are adequately supported by the record and are not clearly erroneous. Two sections that were subsequently enacted as Mont. To a candidate are limited as follows: (i) for candidates filed jointly for the office of governor and lieutenant governor. It increased the amount that political parties are permitted to contribute. A candidate for the state house of representatives may receive no more M.C.A. § 13 37 216(3) reads:
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="48"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/Aug1998/98a1947p.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Appellant Mumia Abu Jamal was convicted of murdering a Philadelphia police officer and is currently on death row at the State Correctional Institute at Greene. Jamal alleges that this rule is unconstitutional and that the Department used this rule as a pretext to retaliate against him for the content of his writings. Jamal was serving a prison disciplinary sentence for engaging in the profession of journalism at S.C.I. The court held that the disciplinary proceedings and the Department's decision to open Jamal's mail were not motivated by retaliation for Jamal's writings. The district court found that the Department's justifications for denying media access to Jamal were not credible. Concluded that this action was clearly retaliatory. This order is not challenged on appeal. 3 We conclude that Jamal has a reasonable probability of demonstrating that the Department's actions violated his rights under the First and Fourteenth Amendments. That Jamal has demonstrated that he will be subject to irreparable harm if the injunction is not granted.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="48"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200113725.opn.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
They were not engaged in soliciting or accepting orders for options contracts. BACKGROUND Mass Media and CRS are advertising. Sponsored advertisements were produced at the request and under the direction of a specific Introducing Broker. Were Congress amended the CEA in 1982 to resolve the need to
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="48"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/728D5F3B6D62954888256C3E00584505/$file/0035924.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
At issue in this case are two of the provisions contained in that initiative. The district court's factual findings are adequately supported by the record and are not clearly erroneous. Two sections that were subsequently enacted as Mont. To a candidate are limited as follows: (i) for candidates filed jointly for the office of governor and lieutenant governor. It increased the amount that political parties are permitted to contribute. A candidate for the state house of representatives may receive no more M.C.A. § 13 37 216(3) reads:
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="48"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/june2002/01-11197.opn.html">RENDON V. VALLEYCREST PRODUCTIONS, LTD. (6/18/2002, NO. 01-11197)<BR></A><BR>
Because the automated telephone contestant selection process was not conducted at a physical location. It was not a place of
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="48"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.fedcir.gov/opinions/04-1041.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
This disposition is not citable as precedent. It is a public record. On the ground that the term is merely descriptive. Because we conclude that the Board's decision was supported by substantial evidence and was not otherwise legally erroneous. If promotional materials were unavailable. It is presumed that the applicant's `water and wastewater filters' are used in dual sand filtration systems.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="48"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=98-1121.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Were on brief for appellee. Customs agents who were monitoring a
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="48"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/dc/opinions/97opinions/97-3168a.html">USA V. CLARK ANDRE P.<BR></A><BR>
With her on the brief were <i>Wilma A. <p> Lewis</i>. Defendant An <p> dre Clark was found guilty of unlawful possession of a firearm <p> by a convicted felon. He was sentenced to 90 months in prison on each count. He challenges his convictions on the <p> following grounds: (1) that the evidence was insufficient to <p> warrant conviction on any count. We reject all of these challenges. <p> Clark also contends that he should only have been convicted <p> once rather than twice for unlawfully possessing both a <p> firearm and the ammunition with which it was loaded. We agree that <p> defendant is correct. Police officers <p> Otis McGinnis and Daymeion Harris stopped an automobile <p> that was traveling over 40 miles per hour in a 25 miles per <p> hour zone. Andre Clark was the driver and sole occupant of <p> the car. The <p> document was a cellular phone contract in the name of Paul <p> Green. After a radio check disclosed that defendant <p> did not have a valid license. He was placed under arrest for <p> driving without a permit.<p> <p> Officer McGinnis then began to search the passenger com <p> partment.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="48"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/fed/opinions/01opinions/01-1276.html">HEWLETT PACKARD COMPANY V. PAVKARD PRESS<BR></A><BR>
Inc. s (Packard Press s) application for registration of the mark PACKARD TECHNOLOGIES for data processing and data transmission services.<span style=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="48"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/96/12/962606P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
These appeals were consolidated for oral argument. Which was expedited at the Reporters' request. We entered an order which stated
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="48"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/49F73C863DE5878688256BE20074E049/$file/0056043.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
CU's motion for summary judgment was granted by the district court. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. I. BACKGROUND CU is a nonprofit corporation that engages in comparative testing and evaluation of consumer products and services. The results of which are published in the magazine Consumer Reports. Was introduced in the United States in 1985. The petition was denied. Although the NHTSA emphasized that the denial was not an endorsement of the safety performance of a vehicle. A double lane change avoidance maneuver test course that CU had used since 1973.2 The long course was designed to replicate an emergency situation in which a driver suddenly steers a vehicle left into the opposing lane. Several CU personnel were in attendance during the April 20 testing. CU driver Kevin Sheehan reported that the Samurai was
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="48"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=95-1235.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Suris & Godreau were on brief for appellant. Ram rez Lavandero & Associates were on brief for appellees. Appellant Romero Barcelo was the Governor of Puerto Rico. Subpoenas were issued for documents in the possession of the 1Rule 12(b)(6) dismissals are reviewed under the rubric that
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="48"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/7DC7CA9E98E56D4A88256C56005871DC/$file/0130017.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Politz was originally a member of this panel and heard argument in this case. Graber was drawn as a replacement. The district court found that Parish's conduct was
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="48"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/031448.P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
It is now before us for the second time after a remand by the Supreme Court. The main question today is this: whether a federal court has jurisdiction over a local carrier's claim that a state utility commission misinterpreted interconnection agreement provisions on reciprocal compensation that are based on federal law. We hold that there is federal question jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1331. That the action was not filed on a timely basis. The case will be remanded for further proceedings on the incumbent local carrier's contract misinterpretation claim. Telephone service in a local calling area was provided by a single local exchange carrier (local carrier). The duty to interconnect is coupled with other duties set forth in § 251. When the direction is reversed. The terms under which two competing local carriers interconnect their networks and provide for reciprocal compensation are set forth VERIZON MARYLAND v. Inc.) was providing local telephone service in Maryland. (We will refer to MFS Intelenet in the name of its successor.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="48"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/06a0448n-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The Taylor Police Chief . . . told various Taylor officials that Laurent was a convicted felon. That he was involved in criminal activity. Bonner also issued a memo to the Taylor Police Department stating that plaintiff Thomson was large. Was to be stopped and held for questioning. [Taylor Chief] also falsely told [Ferndale chief] that Eclipse was violating a contract with Ford Motor Company by selling bumpers on the internet rather than reclaiming the chromium from the bumpers as purportedly required by the contract. . . . . 2 Nos. 04 1798 / 04 2205 Technology Recycling Corp. v. Tom Thomson was hired by Mr. Plaintiffs produced 246 pages of documents and 29 compact discs (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="48"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//june2002/01-11197.opn.html">RENDON V. VALLEYCREST PRODUCTIONS, LTD. (6/18/2002, NO. 01-11197)<BR></A><BR>
Because the automated telephone contestant selection process was not conducted at a physical location. It was not a place of
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="48"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/sept96/94-6668.opa.html">LITTLE V. BRELAND<BR></A><BR>
This document was created from RTF source by rtftohtml version 2.7.5 > <title>Little v. Visitors Corporation was a matter of public controversy thereby making Little a limited purpose public figure. The district court held that Little was a limited purpose public figure and was required to prove actual malice to prevail on his defamation claim. A limited purpose public figure is
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="48"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/July1996/96a1380p.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The ultimate question in this appeal is whether the district court abused its discretion in declining to continue a sentencing proceeding so that a newspaper could fully litigate its motion to unseal sentencing documents. Is capable of repetition yet evading review. Hence the appeal is not moot. We will therefore affirm the judgment of the district court. The central character in the affair is Ernest Preate. The government wished to offer evidence supporting the sentencing enhancements it was seeking. The Order explained the basis for these actions: PG Publishing
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="48"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//may2000/99-10087.man.html">LEIGH V. WARNER BROS., INC. (5/25/2000, NO. 99-10087)<BR></A><BR>
The role of the court in determining whether images are
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="48"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca10.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=04-2098.wpd">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
BACKGROUND Forest Guardians is a New Mexico nonprofit organization that seeks to increase public awareness of land management issues confronting federal agencies with responsibility over public land. Forest Guardians' mission is to acquire. (3) when (3) Base property is defined as
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="48"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/00a0138p-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
File Name: 00a0138p.06 Because we conclude that there was no manifest miscarriage of justice in Scott's trial or sentencing that would authorize us to issue a federal writ of habeas corpus countermanding the judgment of the Ohio courts. We are convinced that the district court erred in holding that the ground on which it granted the writ was not procedurally barred. Because we conclude that the district court correctly held that the other grounds raised by Scott's petition were either defaulted or without merit. We will reverse the issuance of the writ. Factual History The facts of the underlying crime are not in significant dispute. The following summary is largely taken from the district court's Order. Any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt. This claim is not procedurally defaulted. Scott argues that the evidence adduced at trial was insufficient to prove that he committed or attempted to commit aggravated robbery. As the only specification that made him deatheligible was
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="48"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/07a0253p-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The plaintiffs are a collection of associations and individuals led by the American Civil Liberties Union. Because we cannot find that any of the plaintiffs have standing for any of their claims. Of telephone and email communications where one party to the communication is located outside the United States and the NSA has
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="48"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=92-1447.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Is amended as follows: Page 50. Delete the sentence that starts with
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="48"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200501/04-5026a.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
With him on the briefs was Kirk T. With him on the brief was William H. A magistrate judge concluded that the Commodity Futures Trading Commission's defense of the Act was not substantially justified. On appeal we reject the Commission's argument that it should not be held liable for fees because it was obligated to defend the statute. We also conclude that the Commission's defense was a reasonable one on the merits. Makes it unlawful for any commodity trading advisor (CTA)
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="48"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/011266.U.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Wells's defamation claims are based on statements Liddy made alleging that Wells was involved with a call girl ring while working as a secretary at the Democratic National Committee (DNC) in 1972. This court further held that Wells was a private individual. That while a showing of actual malice was required to recover punitive and presumed damages. She needed only to prove that Liddy was negligent in making the statements to recover compensatory damages. The jury was unable to render a verdict. Holding that no reasonable jury could find that Liddy was negligent in making the allegedly false statements. Wells was employed at the DNC offices in Washington. All seven were indicted by a federal grand jury on September 15. Liddy was charged with multiple counts of burglary. Was tried. Wiretapping charges but then claimed that he was pressured to plead guilty and lie during the district court proceedings. Liddy presented an alternative theory behind the Watergate These past events that are more completely recounted in our earlier opinion.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="48"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/alpha-idx.html">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Eleventh Circuit
OPINION/ORDER
4113 brought this action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 against three state officials who were supervisors within the Department. Allen alleged that the defendants retaliated against him and conspired to retaliate against him in violation of his First Amendment rights because he spoke out on abuse of inmates at the Hawaii correctional facilities where he was employed. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. Allen was employed from 1987 through 1997 by the Hawaii Department of Corrections. He began working at the Department of Corrections on a fee for service basis and was hired in January 1995 to fill the part time permanent position of Physician I at Halawa. Defendant Guy Hall was Warden of Halawa from November 1993 to November 1995. Defendant George Iranon was Acting Director and then Director of the Department of Public Safety from July 1994 to December 1996. Defendant Eric Penarosa was Deputy Director for Corrections from the early 1990s. Allen was never referred to the Department's Internal Affairs unit.
OPINION/ORDER
The role of the court in determining whether images are
OPINION/ORDER
I. This is an unusual case. Tageldin was turned over to the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) who continued to detain him and issued a notice to appear dated September 17. Tageldin was released from custody on a bond with no opposition from the INS or any other federal law enforcement agency. He is a native and citizen of Egypt. 2. He is a Muslim. 3. He was arrested and questioned by the FBI on September 15. His arrest and detention was documented by the media. Tageldin alleges that when he was arrested by the FBI on September 15. The news media was there to record the event. Egypt was one of the countries which took such steps. 6. Detention and questioning have become known to the Egyptian authorities and he would be labeled a terrorist by the Egyptian authorities. It is well established that the Egyptian authorities' treatment of prisoners includes numerous violations of basic human rights including beatings. Took place more than one year after his entry into the United States and those were the changed country conditions that led to his filing and untimely application for asylum. 9.
OPINION/ORDER
The Court has determined that this portion of its ruling should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. Gasanova must prove that she was denied the opportunity
Argued for plaintiffs appellants.On the brief was Russell D. Argued for defendant appellee.With her on the brief were Peter D. Keisler. Director.Of counsel on the brief were Susan L. Launer and Roberta L. The court determined that plaintiffs failed to state a claim for breach of contract because they were unable to establish the existence of an implied in fact contract with the government arising from their filing of lottery applications for cellular communication licenses with the Federal Communications Commission (the Commission ).Id. at 51 55.On the second point. 402(b).Id. at 55 60.
We agree with the Court of Federal Claims that plaintiffs claims are covered by subsection 402(b).
OPINION/ORDER
The Commonwealth contends that Yohn is not entitled to habeas relief because no constitutional error occurred when the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania became involved in a trial court ruling on the admissibility of evidence. We will affirm the order of the district court granting the writ of habeas corpus. We will vacate the order of the district court to the extent that it directs that the wiretap evidence be excluded and leave that ruling to the state court upon retrial. I. The relevant facts are not disputed. Andrew Kollar was shot and killed by a single shotgun blast outside his home in Old Zionsville. Lynn was recruited to gain entry into Kollar's house under the guise of car trouble. Lynn was to restrain Kollar at gunpoint while Southerland and Yohn entered the house and searched for money. Was shot in the back. The deal was conditioned upon the accuracy of Southerland's role in the incident as the
The role of the court in determining whether images are
OPINION/ORDER
The case is therefore orderedsubmitted without oral argument. BALDOCK. Plaintiffs Bennie Maestas and Ray Hort are employees of the City of Albuquerque's Solid Waste Management Department (SWMD). Is responsible for maintenance. SWMD is responsible for developing the specifications for VMD's refuse trucks and equipment. Plaintiffs briefs are devoid ofany issue statement relating to municipal liability or argument as to why municipal liability is appropriate in this instance. Pratt called a second meeting with Maestas and Hort:
OPINION/ORDER
Character generation is the process of placing text over video and audio. Only portions of the 1995 agreement are relevant to this case. Are compatible only with a video component called a PCI bus. The programming language for Macintosh and Windows machines was similarly incompatible. It soon became clear that the personal computing market was going the way of Windows. That all other intellectual property rights not licensed by the agreement were deemed held exclusively by MSI. Then [Media 100] shall have a paid up license to (1) modify the CG Option 2.0 source code. This new product line was named
OPINION/ORDER
We agree with the District Court that there is no likelihood of confusion
OPINION/ORDER
Alleging that the software had substantial
(5) the evidence is insufficient to sustain her convictions on each of the five counts. (7) the district court was without authority to amend the judgment to include a missing forfeiture award. Beard's review of the documents made him suspect Edelmann's company did not actually have access to the more than $2. 000 was secured and accessible to Edelmann. A subsequent investigation of the financial statements and tax returns forwarded to Beard by Edelmann revealed that they were not genuine. Edelmann's second mail fraud count was based upon her actions in connection with an application for a home loan. Edelmann was required to bring $102. Edelmann's first wire fraud count was based on actions she took before closing on her house. Edelmann responded to Thomas Richardson's newspaper ad in which Richardson stated that he was interested in purchasing property for cash. She falsely represented to Richardson that she was an attorney and that she would ensure that all documents were legally sufficient. Explaining that because the anticipated return on her overseas investment was delayed.
OPINION/ORDER
The Beatties noticed several defects in it and in the way that it was set up. Fuqua initiated the present action by filing a complaint in the United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri claiming that it was libeled by the website and sign and seeking damages for the harm to its business reputation. Fuqua first contends that the district court erred in entering judgment for the Beatties because the court should have applied Iowa law rather than Missouri law to the case. The district court's choice of law is central to this case because judgment 2 as a matter of law would have been improper under Iowa law: Missouri law requires proof of actual damages in a libel case while Iowa law adheres to the rule that damages may be presumed in an action for libel per se. We believe that the path to the answer to the choice of law question is a good deal more complex than that. Should have applied the forum state's conflictof laws rules. The district court should have given effect to what is called the whole law of the forum.
OPINION/ORDER
The question in this asylum case is whether the immigration judge properly applied the
OPINION/ORDER
Hollowood was discharged four days later. The primary duties of a labor and delivery RNFA are to assist surgeons in Cesarean sections. A
OPINION/ORDER
With him on the briefs was Michael L. Martin was on the briefs for appellant Dorothy O. With him on the brief were Christopher J. The ALJ found that S&B was actually controlled not by Schulze and Brigham but rather by their brother. Ozan was the real party in interest not only in S&B's Blanco application. Schulze was at that breakfast. The Review Board stated that
With him on the briefs were Richard M. With him on the 2 brief were Peter D. Phillips were on the brief for intervenors AT&T Corporation and Verizon Telephone Companies. Challenge an order of the Federal Communications Commission (
1983 and various state statutes for allegedly violating their First Amendment rights by misusing his position as sheriff to defeat their petition drive to have him removed from office. Meneley was later removed from office. 150 (Kan. 2001).
The district court here initially ruled that Meneley was entitled to qualified immunity because the plaintiffs had not produced sufficient evidence that their First Amendment rights to political expression and free association had. They had continued to participate vigorously in public debate. Id. But the district court reversed itself on reconsideration in light of the plaintiffs' argument that it should have used the objective standard for evaluating harms articulated in our First Amendment retaliation cases. Seeid.. The district court found that Meneley's abuse of his official position in running the plaintiffs' names was actionable under the retaliation cases because it should have chilled a person of ordinary firmness from engaging in protected political expression. Id. at 594 96.
We have jurisdiction to hear appeals of the denial of qualified immunity when they turn on an issue of law. Mitchell v.
OPINION/ORDER
USVI 00820 and motion seeking to amend the judgment in Selkridge I to indicate that the grant of summary judgment was without prejudice to filing a new lawsuit. We determine that we are without jurisdiction to hear an appeal of the grant of summary judgment in Selkridge I because an appeal was not timely taken. While we conclude that Judge Moore should have recused himself before entering the order granting summary judgment in Selkridge II and the order denying Selkridge's Rule 60(b) motion in Selkridge I. Given that our independent plenary review convinces us that the results reached were required as a matter of law. We will affirm both December 23. I. Background Selkridge was enrolled in a group insurance plan with Omaha during the period in which she was employed by the Virgin Islands Telephone Company and its successors. The motion contended that all of Selkridge's claims arose
OPINION/ORDER
Grimmett also challenges the constitutionality of one statute under which he was convicted. Grimmett's conviction and hold that 2251 is a valid exercise of Congress's power. Is also constitutional as applied to Mr. By having the child emulate what was occurring on a video playing in the bedroom. The affidavit stated in its third paragraph: This affidavit is made in support of an application for a warrant to search the entire premises located at 920 SE 33rd Street. This application is to search any computer media found therein. The affidavit further stated:
Kansas was the proper suspect. The young woman was upset. State that she is 5'1
OPINION/ORDER
With her on the brief were Peter D. Of counsel on the brief was Elizabeth C. Cheney did not receive the statutory procedural protections to which he was entitled before his suspension. Cheney is entitled by reason of his improper suspension. Cheney was a GS 14 criminal investigator and the Resident Agent in Charge (
OPINION/ORDER
BY THE COURT: This case is before the court on Plaintiff Appellant's petition for rehearing and on her motion to supplement the record or for a remand to do so. The motion to supplement the record or to remand is DENIED. Although we have inherent equitable power to supplement the record with information not reviewed by the district court.
OPINION/ORDER
I. BACKGROUND & PROCEDURAL HISTORY Anton Pusztai and Anita Yates (
OPINION/ORDER
In which Ochoa is a criminal defendant. Sitting by designation. 2 is an intervenor. I. BACKGROUND In the 1980s Ochoa was a high ranking member of the Medellín drug cartel based out of Medellín. Was released in 1997. He was extradited to this country in 2001. Ochoa was cash poor and land rich. Ochoa sought to admit evidence at trial about an illegal scheme called the
OPINION/ORDER
I. Background a. 1 Facts1 The following facts are taken from the Affidavit of then FBI Special Agent David Moriguchi in support of the search and seizure of Gourde's home computer and related property. This site is in full compliance with United States Code Title 18 Part I Chapter 110 Section 2256. The visitor to the website was then directed to a second page. What you will find here at Lolitagurls.com is a complete collection of young girl pics. I have never seen so many good pictures of lolitas. You have the best lolita girls pics ever!
OPINION/ORDER
PUGH 3257 was convicted is overbroad in violation of the First Amendment. Unless such communication is permitted by the rules of the proceeding. Some of the individuals Turney lobbied were wearing badges that identified them as jurors. Would have heard the following message: Thank you for calling the Fully Informed Jury Association. FIJA is a nonprofit educational association that wants all Americans to know their rights as jurors to judge the law itself as well as the facts regardless of the instructions from the judge because jurors cannot be punished for their verdict. They are the final check and balance on our government. Call 406793 5550 or we will mail you more free information on jury veto power. Was selected for the petit jury in State v. Ellis announced to the other jurors that he had called 1 800 TEL JURY and that he was changing his vote in the case because
OPINION/ORDER
Plaintiffs appeal this denial.2 The district court's decision was based on two alternative grounds: (1) plaintiffs lacked standing to pursue injunctive relief. Plaintiffs must demonstrate a concrete injury and a realistic likelihood that the injury will be repeated.5 Likelihood of recurrence is established when the plaintiff shows that
OPINION/ORDER
Is VACATED and REMANDED. Is DISMISSED. An NSL is an administrative subpoena that allows the FBI to gain access to. 1 when this information is
OPINION/ORDER
We will affirm the judgment of the District Court. The software Voicenet/OTI use to provide that access is called
OPINION/ORDER
We will affirm in part. Was appointed Borough Manager of Kutztown in early 1991. ¶¶4. Hill was responsible for the administration of all departments within the Borough. ¶¶1011. The Mayor intensified his attacks on Hill as retaliation for this reporting (and for positions Hill took that were contrary to the Mayor's positions). Hill's employment was the responsibility of the Borough Council. The things Marino was saying. Marino has hurt the borough is in the manner in which he has conducted himself in the bars. He has made many statements in those places of how he is going to get rid of certain council members and plans to have this or that borough employee replaced . . . His statements concerning these individuals are hurting the borough because they . . . are based on false opinions . . . [T]hose statements are hurting the good reputation of our hard working employees. ¶23. Purportedly because of his involvement in certain appointments by [the] Council which the Mayor described as a `plot' that was corrupt and criminal.
OPINION/ORDER
This is a consolidated case. The Heiser Plaintiffs are individuals who live or have lived in or near Oak Ridge. Who allegedly have cancer or have an increased risk of acquiring cancer or other diseases. The Ball Plaintiffs are African Americans who live or have lived in a community known as Scarboro in Oak Ridge. Plaintiffs claim that they have been harmed through exposure to radioactive and other toxic substances over the period when nuclear weapons were manufactured in Oak Ridge. Defendants are private contractors of the United States government that operate or have operated nuclear weapons manufacturing and research facilities in the Oak Ridge Reservation (
OPINION/ORDER
This is a consolidated case. The Heiser Plaintiffs are individuals who live or have lived in or near Oak Ridge. Who allegedly have cancer or have an increased risk of acquiring cancer or other diseases. The Ball Plaintiffs are African Americans who live or have lived in a community known as Scarboro in Oak Ridge. Plaintiffs claim that they have been harmed through exposure to radioactive and other toxic substances over the period when nuclear weapons were manufactured in Oak Ridge. Defendants are private contractors of the United States government that operate or have operated nuclear weapons manufacturing and research facilities in the Oak Ridge Reservation (
OPINION/ORDER
The city expressly permits the distribution of written materials to private residences if the literature
OPINION/ORDER
While Reed was making dinner. While they were talking. Henyard told her he was going to a night club in Orlando and to see his father in South Florida. The Lewis girls were crying and upset. This is Satan.
OPINION/ORDER
Richard Bondi argue that Scheidler II invalidates all of the Hobbs Act counts in this case that were premised on the extortion of intangible property rights. Which can be satisfied regardless of whether the property right at issue is tangible or intangible. We remand Peter Gotti's case for consideration of resentencing pursuant to This decision is frequently abbreviated as
OPINION/ORDER
Worldwide organization composed of born again believers whose purpose is to evangelize boys and girls with the Gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ and to establish (disciple) them in the local church for Christian living.
Jackson was deprived of due process and an impartial jury when a juror and two witnesses were exposed to television coverage of the trial and the trial court refused to allow the jury to review transcripts of witness testimony. Jackson was convicted of first degree felony murder. Jackson could and should have been raised in his direct appeal. Seeid. ex. Jackson's petition for certiorari to the New Mexico Supreme Court was denied. Seeid. ex. Jackson filed the federal habeas petition on which this appeal is based. (6) and (7) were procedurally barred.
Argued for plaintiffs appellants.With him on the brief were Peter T. Inc. and Quadmation Incorporated.With him on the brief was Luann L. Inc.Of coun
OPINION/ORDER
With her on the brief were Wilma A. Pleaded guilty to violating 18 U.S.C. s 201(c)(1)(B) by receiving illegal gratuities from massage parlors that were flagrantly violating local law. That it
222 and are impermissible because they violate the First and Fifth Amendments of the United States Constitution. It is seductive for us to view this as just another case of reviewing agency action. This case is a harbinger of difficulties encountered in this age of exploding information. Administrative interpretation is at the heart of our responsibility. Which was enacted as part of the Telecommunications Act of 1996. At issue here are the FCC's regulations clarifying the privacy requirements for CPNI.
OPINION/ORDER
This is an appeal from a final judgment of conviction and sentence entered by the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey on March 30. Was convicted of obstruction of justice and conspiracy to obstruct justice. He contends that he is entitled to a new trial because: (1) the district court failed to inquire properly into whether premature jury deliberations prejudiced him. (2) the district court's calculation of the loss under the fraud guideline is not supported by the record. Bertoli urges that if the case is remanded. We will affirm the judgment of conviction but we will vacate the sentence. Therefore we will remand the matter to the district court for resentencing in accordance with this Opinion. Much of the substantive conduct described at the trial is not generally relevant to this appeal. Certain evidence is evidence of conduct underlying Counts One and Two. Bertoli and his co conspirators were charged with unlawfully manipulating the prices of certain stocks. Who was an analyst at the firm of Wood Gundy.
OPINION/ORDER
In which Judge Ervin and Judge Luttig joined. *Judge Ervin participated in the consideration of this case but died prior to the time the decision was filed. The decision is filed by a quorum of the panel pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 46(d). The defendants were employers under the FMLA. Judgment was entered in favor of Hukill in the amount of $17. McGillicuddy is president of ACI. His office is at ACI. Which is located in Arlington. McGillicuddy is also a director of these corporations. Edmonds is the other director of these corporations. Is a director of MAI. Is the secretary treasurer of ACI. Although he is not a director of or shareholder in any of these corporations. McGillicuddy hires a manager who is responsible for managing the automobile service station or tire center's day to day operations.3 Each manager is responsible for hiring employees and negotiating the salary of the new employee using the guidelines established by McGillicuddy. Does have to approve large expenditures. There is no evidence that MAI has any control over the labor relations of KPAC.
This document was created from RTF source by rtftohtml version 2.7.5 > Lorisme v. Chief Judge:<p> <p> Before the court is a petition for review of a decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) that upheld an immigration judge's (IJ) order denying petitioner Cereste Lorisme's request for asylum and withholding of deportation under sections 208 and 243(h) of the Immigration and Naturalization Act (INA). Had arrested Lorisme earlier that day at his church for singing a religious song with the words:
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="42"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/op/01/01-1966.PDF">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
This dispute stems from Marty and Laura Nevel's desire to install vinyl siding on a home they own which is located at 311 Lex 2 No. 01 1966 ington Court within the Village of Schaumburg. Was a large home built in 1930. The Commission shall 1 Kretzschmar received title to the property through a Trustee's Deed which was recorded with the Cook County Recorder on February 26. The Commission is the Olde Schaumburg Centre Commission. It is undisputed that the Village failed to serve Kretzschmar with notice of its intent to designate the Property as a historic landmark or to notify him of the public hearing on the matter. The landmark designation was. Once a property is designated a historic landmark. There is nothing in the record to indicate that Kretzschmar did anything to challenge the historical designation of the Property once he became aware of it. The Village asserts that at the time the notice was sent France was designated in township records as the owner of the Property. 3 4 No. 01 1966 When the Nevels purchased the Property.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="42"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/1998/05/97-2063.htm">97-2063 -- JACKSON V. SHANKS -- 05/05/1998<BR></A><BR>
Circuit Judges. <p> <hr align=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="42"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/Nov1994/94a0885p.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
This is a trade dress infringement action brought under section 43(a) of the Lanham Act. That Travis is liable for manufacturing the molds for Joy's planter. Because Duraco's claim is predicated upon infringement of the trade dress of the product itself. Constitute inherently distinctive trade dress thus serving as a designator of origin that will protect the plaintiff's product design features against copying. Insofar as it is not a symbol according to which one can relate the signifier (the trademark. Along with the degree to which the mark describes the product is unsuited for application to the product itself. We also think that there is a proper set of circumstances for treating a product configuration as inherently distinctive. These circumstances are characterized by a high probability that a product configuration serves a virtually exclusively identifying function for consumers where the concerns over
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="42"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/fdocs/docs.fwx?submit=showbr&shofile=04-3421_028.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
While he was enrolled at Franklin Middle School in Champaign. He was repeatedly molested by the school's Dean of Students. That Champaign Community Schools Unit District No. 4 and various school officials were deliberately indifferent to the abuse. Because it was relevant to his claim for compensatory damages. We conclude the Does are entitled to a new trial for three reasons. I. BACKGROUND John Doe first enrolled at Franklin Middle School in 1993 as a sixth grader.1 The parties do not dispute that Doe was 1 John Doe and the other putative victims are all African Americans. Smith is Caucasian. Underprivileged African American boys because they were particularly vulnerable and less likely (continued...). No. 04 3421 3 a troubled child whose classroom conduct was disruptive at times. Smith would often seek out Doe on the playground and order him to Smith's office because he was a troublemaker.2 At trial. Smith invited Doe to have breakfast with him. Was the beginning of the molestation. Sexual grooming is
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="42"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/961960.U.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. Outlaw was one of seventeen managers terminated by Standard after Corporate executives determined that the plant was being managed poorly. Pricing and management issues were at the core of the problems at the Spartanburg plant.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="42"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2004/09/02-1405.htm">02-1405 -- DONOHUE V. HOEY -- 09/21/2004<BR></A><BR>
Eighteen months later her slain body was found abandoned in a wooded area in the neighboring county. During the time Buffy was missing. They alleged that the investigation was so deficient that it violated their federal and state constitutional and statutory rights. The Rices claim that summary judgment was improper in light of the evidence they offered. We agree with the district court and affirm. <ol> <li>BACKGROUND</strong></li> </ol> <p> <strong> Because this case is before us on appeal from a district court's decision granting summary judgment. The Rices promptly filed a missing person report. <p> The Rices' biggest complaint about the subsequent investigation is that the police missed the most obvious suspects: Evonne Haley and David Middleton. These individuals were the prime suspects right from the start. There he had been charged with the kidnaping and sexual assault of a teenage girl and was ultimately convicted for false imprisonment and aggravated assault. He was a prime suspect in the investigation.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="42"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2001/07/00-4058.htm">00-4058 -- UTAH LICENSED BEVERAGE ASSOCIATION V. LEAVITT -- 07/24/2001<BR></A><BR>
We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="42"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/D0D65EE63181974B88256DB7007AFAA0/$file/0256956.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Salvaty and Vanessa Koury were on the brief. Is hereby ordered amended as follows: Slip Op. at 11878: In the first sentence of the first paragraph. The petition for rehearing and the petition for rehearing en banc are denied. I The copyrighted works at issue here (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="42"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2002/04/01-6062.htm">01-6062 -- WILEY V. OHIO/OKLAHOMA HEARST-ARGYLE TELEVISION INC. -- 04/05/2002<BR></A><BR>
The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. <p> In this diversity case. She was asked to leave after witnesses saw her taking donated items without permission. <p> On May 5. Police were notified. Who was accused of taking items from the relief center without permission. She was approached by a security guard. The detective also prepared a report for the district attorney's office which listed under the category of
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="42"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/DD1D64C89DB4D64188256D8800793C2D/$file/0256956.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Salvaty and Vanessa Koury were on the brief. I The copyrighted works at issue here (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="42"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/199805/98-3033a.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
With him on the brief was Charles F.C. With him on the brief was Max Stier. With her on the brief was Charles J. Some individ uals have paused to give their versions of what transpired during their grand jury appearances. Others have refused to be interviewed or to give a public statement. Fay sit on the Division for the Purpose of Appointing Independent Counsels. 2 Appellants are Dow Jones & Company. To a hallway outside the room where the grand jury is sitting. No judge presides and none is present. Inside the grand jury room are sixteen to twenty three grand jurors. The witness is sworn. All to the end of determining whether
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="42"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//dec97/96-5451.man.html">LORISME V. INS<BR></A><BR>
This document was created from RTF source by rtftohtml version 2.7.5 > <title>Lorisme v. Chief Judge:<p> <p> Before the court is a petition for review of a decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) that upheld an immigration judge's (IJ) order denying petitioner Cereste Lorisme's request for asylum and withholding of deportation under sections 208 and 243(h) of the Immigration and Naturalization Act (INA). Had arrested Lorisme earlier that day at his church for singing a religious song with the words:
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="42"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:8080/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcT1BOXDA0LTI3NDYtY3Jfb3BuLnBkZg==/04-2746-cr_opn.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
1 in which the Supreme Court tightened the requirements for finding that a defendant has 1 This decision is frequently abbreviated as
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="42"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/07a0164a-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
This matter is before the Court on Prime Media. The relevant facts of this case were set forth in the prior appeal as follows: In 1999. The purpose of the ordinance was
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="40"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2004/03/01-8082.htm">01-8082 -- BROWN V. LABARGE -- 03/01/2004<BR></A><BR>
</strong> Circuit Judges. <p> <hr align=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="40"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/19939345.REH.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
BY THE C O U R T: This case is before the court on Plaintiff Appellant's petition for rehearing and on her motion to supplement the record or for a remand to do so. The motion to supplement the record or to remand is DENIED. Although we have inherent equitable power to supplement the record with information not reviewed by the district court.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="40"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/BEBFCF2596C865C688256B5E005D99DD/$file/0035328.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Mike Cohn appeals the district court's grant of summary judgment on his claim that Petsmart infringes his trademark
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="40"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200015378.OPN.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Chief Judge: This is an interlocutory appeal from the entry of a preliminary injunction in a copyright infringement suit that was initiated by four major television network stations and associations representing hundreds of local network affiliates against EchoStar Satellite Company and its subsidiaries. That there was a substantial likelihood that the Networks could establish that EchoStar provides distant network signals to
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="40"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2000/07/99-2293.htm">99-2293 -- GARCIA V. SHANKS -- 07/27/2000<BR></A><BR>
The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. <p> In this 42 U.S.C.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="40"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:8080/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcT1BOXDA0LTUwMDctY3Jfb3BuLnBkZg==/04-5007-cr_opn.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Circuit Judge: This case arose out of parallel investigations2 of Initial Public Offering (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="40"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/dc/opinions/98opinions/98-1478a.html">LAKESHORE BROADCASTING, INC V. FCC<BR></A><BR>
Jr. argued the cause for appellant. </P> <P>With him on the briefs was Anne Thomas Paxson.</P> <P> Pamela L. On the brief were </P> <P>Christopher J. </P> <P>the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment to the </P> <P>Constitution of the United States by dismissing Lakeshore's </P> <P>application for failure to meet a deadline of which Lakeshore </P> <P>was never given personal notice. Because the Commission's policy is lawful. </P> <P>necessity will be served.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="40"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200611190.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
PER CURIAM: Oba Chandler was convicted of capital murder and sentenced to death in the State of Florida on November 4. After his conviction and sentence were affirmed on direct appeal. State collateral relief was also denied and that denial was affirmed. That petition was denied. The only issue on which Chandler was granted a certificate of appealability involves his claim that his trial counsel rendered ineffective assistance by failing to move a second time for a change of venue. The facts and procedural history relating to this claim are set out in the district court's opinion. Given the evidence that was before the state courts. Their decision regarding this claim was contrary to. Or that it
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="40"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/Dec1995/95a1222p.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
We consider whether a group of former residents and occasional visitors to a neighborhood containing a toxic site were
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="40"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/fdocs/docs.fwx?submit=showbr&shofile=04-1964_020.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Abdelhadi Hor was ordered removed from the United States after his claim of asylum was denied. On the ground that the probability that he could persuade the merits panel to reverse the order of removal was low. Is authorized to reexamine a ruling made by a motions panel. Hor is an Algerian with a technical background who before coming to the United States on a visitor's visa in 2000 was the chief information officer for a large governmentowned manufacturer. He was also an active member of the FLN. In March of 2000 he was stopped at a roadblock set up by members of GIA (Groupe islamique armé). The military wing of the radical Islamic movement that is engaged in what amounts to a civil war with the Algerian government. Hor was ordered to furnish the organization with a list of active members of the FLN and with the security plan of his employer. He was released after promising to comply. As Hor was. Hor was stopped at another GIA roadblock. Armed men ordered him to lie down on the ground and told him they were going to execute him on the spot in retaliation for his having failed to supply the GIA with the promised information.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="40"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/DDD981333B5DBE8E882571AE005839B5/$file/0436009.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Were on the briefs. Circuit Judge: In this case we must decide whether an Oregon state prisoner is entitled to a writ of habeas corpus on the basis of ineffective assistance of counsel in connection with his rape and sodomy convictions in 1983. Weaver was accused of being the
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="40"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:8080/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcT1BOXDA0LTUwMDctY3Jfb3BuLnBkZg==/04-5007-cr_opn.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Circuit Judge: This case arose out of parallel investigations2 of Initial Public Offering (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="40"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/sept2001/00-15378.opn.html">CBS BROAD. V. ECHOSTAR COMMUNICATION CORP. (9/17/2001, NO. 00-15378)<BR></A><BR>
Chief Judge:</SPAN></P> <P><SPAN STYLE=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="40"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/199807/97-5257a.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Was on the brief. I. The facts before us are drawn from appellant's complaint as well as a government document attached as an exhibit to the complaint entitled Special Inquiry Into the Search and Retrieval of William Clinton's Passport Files. P. 10(c) is considered a part thereof for all purposes (the government does not dispute the contents of the latter document). It will be recalled that President Clinton's involvement with the draft during the Vietnam War was a matter of widespread attention and great confusion. State Department personnel reviewing these doc uments became concerned that Clinton's file may have been tampered with in order to eliminate embarrassing materials. (The matter was referred to the FBI. Appellant was involved in the
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="40"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200610/03-1392a.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
With him on the brief were Peter D. I. Background The Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 (AEDPA) authorizes the Secretary of State to designate an entity as a FTO if the Secretary finds: (A) the organization is a foreign organization. As
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="40"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:8080/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcT1BOXDA1LTAwMzEtYWdfb3BuLnBkZg==/05-0031-ag_opn.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Was not credible. Was supported by substantial evidence. Because neither we nor the BIA have established standards by which to evaluate this determination. The petition for review is DENIED in part. Gonzales is automatically substituted for former Attorney General John Ashcroft as the respondent in this case. 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 order of the BIA is VACATED in part. The case is REMANDED to the BIA for further proceedings. The IJ also concluded that petitioner's application was frivolous under Section 208(d) of the INA. Both of these determinations were affirmed. Petitioner submitted an I 589 application (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="40"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=96-1270.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The complaint alleges that Sullivan was housed at the Maine State Prison between September 30. Sullivan was transferred from the Maine State Prison back to the New Hampshire State Prison in retaliation for Sullivan's writing a newspaper column for the Maine Times. The motion was supported by an affidavit of Magnusson attesting that he transferred Sullivan because Sullivan's complaints that he deserved certain employment positions (held by other prisoners) due to what Sullivan considered to be his superior abilities had resulted in staff becoming increasingly unwilling to employ Sullivan and other prisoners becoming increasingly unwilling to work with him. Magnusson further attested that he began to receive reports that the situation had deteriorated to the point that Sullivan's personal safety was at risk from other prisoners. It is well established that a prisoner may not be transferred from one institution to another for engaging in constitutionally protected activity. State action may be upheld if the action would have been taken based on 1The parties devote much of their respective briefs to 1 permissible reasons alone.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="40"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/Jun2000/995117.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
CNIS is a wholly owned subsidiary of Commerce Bancorp. We will reverse.1 I. By the time this litigation was commenced. We have appellate jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. 1291 and review the District Court's factual findings for clear error. We are left with a definite and firm conviction that mistake has been committed. Neither CIA nor CBI were aware that anyone believed that the companies were business affiliates of each other. The application was granted. The District Court first determined that CBI's rights in the Commerce mark were senior to those of CIA. The Court found that CIA's use of the Commerce mark in 1983 was likely to create confusion. Because reasonable consumers dealing with CIA
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="40"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/FAE4FA67AEAA4EDF88256EEB005716EE/$file/0310103.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Argued the case for the appellant and was on the briefs. Maitreya Badami was also on the briefs. Argued the case for the appellee and was on the briefs. Were also on the briefs. Argued the case for amicus curiae Federal Public Defender for the Northern District of California and was on the briefs. Was also on the briefs. This is my punishment.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="40"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=05-1815.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Defendant does not dispute the court\'s finding\ that one of the images is of a prepubescent minor or a child under\ the age of twelve. Nor is there any dispute that the images meet\ the definition of sexually explicit conduct.</p>\ </span>' var WPFootnote3 = '<span class=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="40"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//nov2001/01-10032.opn.html">RUBIN V. U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT, INC. (11/9/2001, NO. 01-10032)<BR></A><BR>
Rubin's claim was dismissed. News interviewed and photographed Rubin for an article it was preparing. Was entitled
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="40"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/04/05/023942P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
I. Agada is a 44 year old native and citizen of Nigeria who worked as a radio journalist for the Federal Radio Corporation of Nigeria (Radio Nigeria) beginning in 1978. He was also an officer of the Nigerian Union of Journalists. He was demoted to working in the library at Radio Nigeria. Was never fired. He was accused of embezzling from Radio Nigeria and questioned on the charges. No further action was taken against him. Although other journalists were arrested. Agada was never detained. Determined that although Agada's testimony was generally credible. An alien is eligible for asylum if he establishes that he is unwilling to return to his country of nationality
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="40"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200607/05-5269a.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
With him on the briefs were Peter D. With him on the brief were Dennis M. The district court concluded that the federal government and its officers have been derelict in their duties.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="40"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/021999.P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Bouchat asserts that the court erroneously failed to accord him the benefit of a statutory presumption that an infringer's revenues are entirely attributable to the infringement. The team was to leave its entire Browns identity in Cleveland. He began drawing logo designs based on the various names that the team was considering. Bouchat's Shield Drawing was found to have been mistakenly used by National Football League Properties. The
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="40"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200310725.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Defendants herein proceeded to trial and were found guilty. I. This trial clearly demonstrates the inherent danger in a multi defendant conspiracy prosecution that individuals who are not actually members of the group will be swept into the conspiratorial net. Because the government is permitted broad prosecutorial discretion to prove the conspiracy. The likelihood exists that those who associate with conspirators will be found guilty of a crime that they have not intended to commit. This danger is compounded when the grand jury indicts on one theory of the illegal conduct. We have seen such conspiracy prosecutions before. The district court was persuaded to permit the government to proceed upon the assumption that the controlling law of mail fraud would change prior to the end of trial. Was both irrelevant and highly prejudicial. We held that fundamental due process was denied the defendants and vacated their convictions. In violation of 18 U.S.C. § 371.1 The defendants were alleged to have used the United States mails in furtherance of a scheme and artifice to defraud McDonald's Corporation (McDonald's).
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="40"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/031101p.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Finding that Child Evangelism was likely to succeed in showing that Stafford was engaging in viewpoint discrimination and that this discrimination was not required by the Establishment Clause. The principal is authorized to duplicate scheduled memos and send the m home with the children. The following non profit organizations are permitted to distribute 3 See
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="40"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/011285.P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Search
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="40"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/031325p.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Were convicted of improperly accepting payments from plumbers whose work they inspected in violation of the Hobbs Act and the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="40"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit/nov2001/01-10032.opn.html">RUBIN V. U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT, INC. (11/9/2001, NO. 01-10032)<BR></A><BR>
Rubin's claim was dismissed. News interviewed and photographed Rubin for an article it was preparing. Was entitled
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="40"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/055340p.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The fourth claim was for negligent misrepresentation. The plaintiffs also assert that primary jurisdiction was an improper basis for dismissal. That their unjust enrichment claim was improperly dismissed on the ground that they had not pled individual reliance. That they should have been allowed to amend their complaint. We will affirm the judgment of the District Court.1 The District Court had diversity jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332(d)(2) and (6). Which confers federal jurisdiction over class actions where
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="40"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="ftp://opinions.ca5.uscourts.gov/unpub/03/03-21152.0.wpd.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Eberhardt alleged that he was prescribed Vioxx in October 1999 and that he was continually treated with the medication until mid August 2000. The court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4. * No. 03 21152 2nevertheless dismissed the complaint based on a sua sponte determination that the complaint was not filed within the applicable statute of limitations. The court determined that because Eberhardt's complaint was time barred.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="40"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/Aug1999/981749.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
We will affirm the dismissal by the District Court. 2 Plaintiff John J. Was assigned in January 1994 to investigate possible insider trading violations growing out of a proposed bank merger. Criminal charges were lodged against Hunter in state court. Were married in May 1995. He starts sharing with her information which we believe she is now using to demand two million dollars of Mr. It is this action that presently concerns us. 1. Hunter was convicted of molestation and sentenced to eight to fourteen years imprisonment. Was sentenced to a term of incarceration. That conviction is presently on appeal. 4 The section 1985(2) count asserted that Hunter and Bochetto had conspired to file a frivolous lawsuit and disseminate defamatory information to the media to intimidate and punish Heffernan so as to affect his attendance and testimony as a witness against Hunter in federal court proceedings. It held that witnesses did not have standing to bring an action under section 1985(2). Heffernan was granted leave to amend the section 1985(1) claim with respect to the publicity campaign.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="40"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca3.uscourts.gov/opinarch/051839np.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and 18 U.S.C. § 3742(a). USPIS then provided King with an order form for various videotapes which were described as containing depictions of minors engaged in sexually explicit activity.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="40"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/19938474.OP.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Circuit Judge: This is an appeal from the district court's entry of a preliminary injunction1 enjoining a putative infringer from infringing the compilation copyright of a publisher of a cable television factbook. System finding of that the the copyright selecting names of communities under which to list the data in its factbook was sufficiently creative and original to warrant copyright protection. All have yet to be addressed by the district court. No final judgment was entered under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 because the court has not yet disposed of all the claims in the case and did not make its injunction a final judgment pursuant to Fed. The order before us is an interlocutory order for an injunction that is subject to review under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(a)(1). 2 Publishing Corp. v. Did not have the benefit of our en banc opinion in BellSouth. Ed. 2d 232 (1994). 3 this case is the
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="40"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2003/10/03-1225.htm">03-1225 -- BARNETT V. STATE OF COLORADO -- 10/10/2003<BR></A><BR>
The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. <p> Daniel James Barnett. Which stated in relevant part:
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="40"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/F2C17F67DE4A8E3888256C94005C4F75/$file/0056470.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Were on the briefs. 2002 is hereby ordered amended as follows: Slip Op. at 13984: Add a footnote on line 3 of the first full paragraph after the word
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="40"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/19938474.MA3.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Circuit Judge: This is an appeal from the district court's entry of a preliminary injunction1 enjoining a putative infringer from infringing the compilation copyright of a publisher of a cable television factbook. Finding that the copyright holder's system of selecting the names of communities under which to list the data in its factbook was sufficiently creative and original to warrant copyright protection. All have yet to be addressed by the district court. No final judgment was entered under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 because the court has not yet disposed of all the claims in the case and did not make its injunction a final judgment pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 54(b). The order before us is an interlocutory order for an injunction that is subject to review under 28 U.S.C. § 1292(a)(1). 1 ** * Advertising & Publishing Corp. v. The focus of this case is the
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="40"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/07a0201p-06.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The satellite companies allege that they have further invested more than $1 billion in building. The satellite companies do have
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="40"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/fdocs/docs.fwx?submit=showbr&shofile=04-3373_014.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
He told us that he was going to make between $41. The corporation's correct name is Sinclair Acquisition IV. One of Sinclair's account executives at WICS was Jennifer Valenti. Brummett is the best bet we've been able to come across at WICS. We have perhaps $100. This 7th [account executive] for WICS is going to be heavily developmental. He was expected to generate as much new advertising business as possible. They were paid on a straight commission basis. If his first six months' performance was acceptable. If his performance was satisfactory. He was given an account list of former advertisers who had not pur 4 No. 04 3373 chased advertising in more than a year. Brummett was doing a good job and would have ranked him as
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="40"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://vls.law.vill.edu/locator/3d/Jul2001/011512.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
The issue on appeal is whether the District Court erred in temporarily sealing the initial filings and hearings concerning a contempt motion filed under Fed. We will affirm. It argued the motion and pr oceedings were entitled to a presumption of openness under Fed. They must remain sealed pending a deter mination whether secret grand jury information was implicated. Subpoenas relating to grand jury pr oceedings shall be kept under seal to the extent and for such time as is necessary to prevent disclosure of matters occurring before a grand jury.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="40"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/common/opinions/199906/96-7239b.txt">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
With him on the briefs were John M. With him on the brief were Wilma A. With him on the brief was Arthur B. Farris was on the brief for amicus curiae Home School Legal Defense Association. Holding that it violates the fundamental rights of minors and their parents and is unconstitutionally vague. Rehearing en banc was granted. Determining that juvenile crime and victimization in the District was a serious prob lem and growing worse unanimously adopted the Juvenile Curfew Act of 1995. The curfew contains eight
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="40"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ll.georgetown.edu/federal/judicial/fed/opinions/00opinions/00-1076.html">PACKARD PRESS, INC V. HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY<BR></A><BR>
With him on the brief was <u>Rachel L. Of counsel was <u>John Tiedge</u>.</p> <p ALIGN=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="40"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/2002/04/00-1415.htm">00-1415 -- BELL V. MANSPEAKER -- 04/10/2002<BR></A><BR>
The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. <p> Defendant appellant R.M. Fisher was granted summary judgment on the basis of qualified immunity. Bell was denied press credentials but apparently was able to view the trial on the day of the opening arguments as a member of the public. Bell who had just exited the courthouse front door and was walking in front of the courthouse. Bell was questioned by Mr. Qualified immunity is sufficient to shield officials in the performance of their public duties. <em>Id.</em> The Court has been
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="40"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/fdocs/docs.fwx?submit=showbr&shofile=06-2454_008.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Ensures that open source software remains free: any attempt to sell a derivative work will violate the copyright laws. Open source software is the Linux operating system. (Unix® is a trademark of The Open Group. The source code to many variants of AT&T's work is freely available.). Linux is one of many modern derivatives of Unix which is not itself under the GPL. Is entitled to charge for its software. Is maintained by a large open source community. People are free to charge for the physical media on which it comes and for assistance in making it work. Thus are the most expensive part of using Linux. Daniel Wallace would like to compete with Linux either by offering a derivative work or by writing an operating system from scratch but maintains that this is impossible as long as Linux and its derivatives are available for free. Novell have conspired among themselves and with others (including the No. 06 2454 3 Free Software Foundation) to eliminate competition in the operating system market by making Linux available at an unbeatable price.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="40"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/opinion.pdf/981720.U.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. The largest secured creditors were Southern Communications. Premier's loan was secured by a lien against all of Legend's equipment. 3 to Southern and Premier accounted for more than eighty percent of Legend's total liabilities. Among the larger unsecured creditors were Richard Edwards and his father. Not only was he an unsecured creditor. Edwards was required to make the loan payments to prevent Premier from seizing the collateral. Without regard to the actual value of the collateral securing the debt.2 The bankruptcy court was further concerned that there had been 2 The Edwards Plan. Both of these creditors were acknowledged to be
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="40"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/39B1A034FA2ADE3688256C3600526BAF/$file/0056470.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Were on the briefs. Whether a television network's incorporation of that video into promotional materials was a fair use. It is frequently the image accompanying the story that leaves an event seared into the viewership's collective memory. CBS BROADCASTING Angeles in April 1992 are bookended by two such images: the footage of police officers beating motorist Rodney King. The latest installment in a series of suits by which the owners of the rights to that videotape have sought to ensure that renown translates into remuneration. Is an independent newsgathering organization that makes and licenses video and audio recordings of breaking news events. Who is LANS's co owner. Are known as
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="40"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca7.uscourts.gov/fdocs/docs.fwx?submit=showbr&shofile=04-1721_017.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Long's guideline range and the extent of that departure were necessarily influenced by the judge's understanding that the guidelines were mandatory. Long failed to raise a Sixth Amendment or Apprendi argument to his sentence below and therefore his appeal is subject to plain error review. Because we cannot determine whether the district court would have imposed the same sentence under an advisory guideline scheme. They No. 04 1721 3 asked Long whether he knew of any employees such as those who had recently been fired who might have wanted to get Long in trouble. The detectives indicated that the illegal items brought to the police were
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="40"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//june97/93-8474.op.html">WARREN PUBL'G CO. V. MICRODOS DATA CORP.<BR></A><BR>
Circuit Judge: <br wp=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="40"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/97/07/954024P.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Hollowell are black. Johnson is white. While Day and Hollowell were still employed by Johnson's predecessor Sheriff Gravett. Johnson was ordered to The district court ruled for Day and Hollowell on their Title VII claims and for Hollowell on his § 1983 As a remedy. When he was appointed jail administrator in January 1993. Which reported them in widely read stories that neither Day nor Hollowell disputed at trial. conditions were unconstitutional. Up to 120 inmates at a time lived in the Conditions were filthy. Inmates in intake could not receive family visits and were denied access to the outdoor exercise area. Inmates waiting in intake for One municipal court judge was forced vacancies that went unfilled. transportation to court often got lost in the crowd. Day's use of intake for housing was not merely unsanitary and disruptive. It was dangerous. were not sorted out. Who are segregated by sex. Day believed the conditions were
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="40"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/10circuit/mar97/95-5275.wpd.html">LUMAN V. CHAMPION<BR></A><BR>
The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. Petitioner Jim Luman sought vacation of two convictions stemming from two separate cases in (1) This order and judgment is not binding precedent. Respondents have not appealed that determination. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. 1291 and review the district court's factual findings for clear error and its legal conclusions de novo. CF 89 1006 are not in dispute. Ninety five boxes of meat were stolen from the Monfort Food Distributing Company in Tulsa. Investigation of the stolen meat focused on petitioner after the butcher to whom Caraway took his boxes of meat became suspicious that it was stolen and contacted Monfort. There was no direct evidence that petitioner knew the meat was stolen. Nor was there any evidence indicating who stole the meat from Monfort. Petitioner was charged with knowingly concealing stolen property (the three boxes of meat he had traded to Caraway) after two or more felony convictions. He was sentenced to thirty years' imprisonment.
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="40"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=91-1665.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Claiming that the patient in the photograph was Lawrence S. That Bevis's privacy rights could not possibly have been violated because the patient in the photograph was obscured by equipment and personnel and was not identifiable. Accompanying the government's motion were affidavits from the public affairs specialist at the VA hospital and the Lowell Sun photographer who had taken the picture. Patients in their beds are subject to being observed by visitors. It was her opinion that
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="40"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.law.emory.edu/11circuit//sept2001/00-15378.opn.html">CBS BROAD. V. ECHOSTAR COMMUNICATION CORP. (9/17/2001, NO. 00-15378)<BR></A><BR>
Chief Judge:</SPAN></P> <P><SPAN STYLE=
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="40"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/9A8A5C6DF4191E6C88256E5A00707BD3/$file/9955563.pdf?openelement">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
An article from this issue entitled
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="40"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=91-1590.01A">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Burns & Levinson were on brief for appellant. Dana & Gould were on brief for appellees. Appellant Phantom Touring Company produces a musical comedy version of
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="40"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://pacer.cadc.uscourts.gov/docs/common/opinions/200604/05-5161a.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
With him on the briefs was Michael C. With him on the brief were Kenneth L. After the article was published. To ask why it was silent on Ballenger's marital status. Believing that at least some of his readership was interested in the separation. Ballenger was unavailable. Taking place during regular business hours while Gurley was working in Ballenger's office suite on Capitol Hill. It focused on legislative issues particularly trade and textiles that were of interest to Congressman Ballenger and his 3 constituents. Adding that it was amicable. I was acutely aware that my ability to continue advancing my legislative agenda in Congress and to effectively represent my district depended on the continued trust and respect of my constituents. I was acutely aware that a public scandal related to my marital status could undercut my ability to carry out these responsibilities. Both in the near term and in the long term if it were to become an issue in a future re election campaign. Ballenger stated that CAIR was the
</TD>
</TR>
<TR CLASS="swhit">
<TD CLASS="swrank"><IMG SRC="/usca/images/score-0.gif" ALT="40"></TD>
<TD CLASS="swtitle"><A HREF="http://www.ca2.uscourts.gov:8080/isysnative/RDpcT3BpbnNcT1BOXDAzLTcwMTJfb3BuLnBkZg==/03-7012_opn.pdf">OPINION/ORDER</A><BR>
Defendant seeks to have the jury's verdict set aside and judgment entered in his favor. The plaintiff was awarded a substantial verdict based on one of Hopkins' libelous s
