Federal Circuit: Redline Detection LLC v. Star Envirotech, Inc.

Patent.

No plain error in Patent Board's refusal to accept new evidence offered solely on the basis of timeliness and relevance.   Agency has discretion, not arbitrary/capricious.

Use of a fog machine to test for leaks in a conduit was not particularly obvious.

[Again, we don't know many things, but we especially don't know Patent.]

http://www.cafc.uscourts.gov/sites/default/files/opinions-orders/15-1047.Opinion.12-29-2015.1.PDF



Ninth Circuit - James Styers v. Charles Ryan

Habeas/AEDPA.

Very complex.  Here's our best guess on a first read:

When a state court re-evaluates a capital sentence due to a Federal Habeas writ, the case remains under collateral appeal, and is therefore not subject to non-retroactive changes in the substantive law.

In this case, the state court can consider a mitigating factor in a plenary consideration (whether Arizona's procedure here is genuinely de novo appears to be an open question) and impose the capital sentence without sending the case to a jury.

https://d3bsvxk93brmko.cloudfront.net/datastore/opinions/2015/12/30/12-16952.pdf

Ninth Circuit: Adobe Systems v. Joshua Christenson

IP - Copyright & Trademark

Where a first sale defense to copyright infringement is argued, the party asserting the defense has the burden to prove the sale, but the party claiming infringement has the burden to prove that the apparent sale was actually a license.

General testimony and generic licensing templates do not suffice for proof that a specific transaction was a license.

An assertion that goods were sold under the correct mark, but without the consent of the owner of the mark speaks to unfair competition, not infringement.

https://d3bsvxk93brmko.cloudfront.net/datastore/opinions/2015/12/30/12-17371.pdf

Ninth Circuit: David Correo-Ruiz v. Loretta Lynch

Immigration.

When a petitioner asserts a reliance on prior precedent and there is a genuine issue of retroactivity, but the record is insufficient to describe the claim, the case should be remanded to the agency for the development of the record.

https://d3bsvxk93brmko.cloudfront.net/datastore/opinions/2015/12/30/12-72126.pdf


Ninth Circuit: Jacquelynn Dorrance v. USA

Tax.

Stock acquired by policyholders upon demutualization of a life-insurance company is taxable, as premiums paid were solely for the defined benefit, and not an accrual of value.

Dissent: Value was accrued beyond the level of anticipated benefit prior to the IPO.

https://d3bsvxk93brmko.cloudfront.net/datastore/opinions/2015/12/30/13-16548.pdf

Ninth Circuit: DM Residential Fund II v. First Tennessee Bank DM

Property - rescission.

Lack of electrical service constitutes inquiry notice for lack of utility easement.

Dissent (Koz):  No duty to investigate in the statute; no proof that they could have investigated; potential fraud claims are TKO'd by summary judgment.

https://d3bsvxk93brmko.cloudfront.net/datastore/opinions/2015/12/30/13-56309.pdf




Seventh Circuit: USA v. Antonio West

Expert testimony - mental handicap.

Where expert testimony on the mental capacity of the defendant can undercut the reliability of a confession, it is admissible on those grounds.

Non-expert testimony subject to the discretion of the court.

http://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/rssExec.pl?Submit=Display&Path=Y2015/D12-30/C:14-2514:J:Sykes:aut:T:fnOp:N:1679527:S:0

Fifth Circuit: Bd. of Trs. Local 392 v. B&B Mech. Servs.

Labor - agency.

Employer's membership in trade negotiating organization sufficed to bind it to the CBA, even though written authorization to bind the employer was never issued.

Secondary certification writings incorporated the unexpired CBA.

http://www.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/15a0301p-06.pdf


Fourth Circuit: Eddy Etienne v. Loretta Lynch

Immigration.

Expedited removal procedures allow aliens no opportunity to raise matters of law related to their deportation - Circuit split flagged.

Checkbox on a form indicating that documents are attached is an insufficient avenue to raise matters not addressed in the other checkbox options.

As Congress implicitly incorporated the common law definition of the crime, a conviction on a state charge of Conspiracy that doesn't require the overt act in furtherance usually required in the modern law still qualifies.

http://www.ca4.uscourts.gov/Opinions/Published/142013.P.pdf