Barnes alleged in her complaint that she was terminated from her position with the
ACC for protesting discriminatory actions on behalf of her employer and participating in
an investigation designed to discover further discrimination. She alleged that her
termination was a violation of the Arkansas Whistle-Blower Act (“AWBA”) and asked for
damages, reinstatement, attorneys’ fees

In October 2003, Henk was charged with first degree murder,
with aggravating circumstances, for the death of his son,
Brendan Gonzalez, which occurred on or about January 6. He
was initially questioned after his son disappeared, but he did
not make any admissions. At a subsequent hearing on an unrelated
charge, Henk admitted in open court to killing Brendan.
He was then int

Plaintiff‐Appellant Great Minds appeals from the March 21, 2017 dismissal
under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6) of its copyright infringement action
against FedEx Office and Print Services, Inc. (“FedEx”) in the United States District
Court for the Eastern District of New York (Hurley, J.). We find that Great Minds’
public license does not explicitly address whether

After a seven-day trial and two days of deliberation, a jury found that Pharrell Williams, Robin Thicke, and Clifford Harris, Jr.’s song “Blurred Lines,” the world’s best-selling single in 2013, infringed Frankie Christian Gaye, Nona Marvisa Gaye, and Marvin Gaye III’s copyright in Marvin Gaye’s 1977 hit song “Got To Give It Up.” Three consolidated appeals followed.

Appellants and Cross-A

Omaha, NE - The Maids International, Inc. sued Maids on Call, LLC et al. on a trademark infringement theory.

Authors write books. Filmmakers make films. Playwrights
craft plays. And television writers, directors, and producers
create television shows and put them on the air -- or, in these
modern times, online. The First Amendment protects these
expressive works and the free speech rights of their creators.
Some of these works are fiction. Some are factual. And some are
a combinat

Following a four-day bench trial, the court entered
judgment in favor of Eleanor Licensing LLC and Denice
Shakarian Halicki and against Classic Recreations, LLC, T&D
Motor Company, Jason Engel and Tony Engel (collectively
Classic), ordering that Eleanor Licensing retain possession of a
vehicle identified as “Eleanor No. 1,” which had been
manufactured by Classic pursuant to

Dr. Edward Tobinick appeals the District Court’s award of attorney’s fees to Dr. Steven Novella. Dr. Tobinick argues both that the District Court’s decision to award attorney’s fees and the amount of fees it awarded were made in error. This case presents an issue of first impression for our circuit. That is, whether the “exceptional case” standard for awarding attorney’s fees in Patent Act cases,

Kenneth Jerome Dawson appeals the dismissal of his action brought pursuant
to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 in which he asserts a violation of his Fourteenth Amendment
substantive due process rights. Dawson challenges the official policies of the
Jefferson County Jail. Due to the timing of Dawson’s detention, the timing of his
posting of bond, and the court-ordered release condition that Dawson

Plaintiff-Appellant Digital Ally, Inc. appeals from the district court’s grant of
summary judgment in favor of Defendant-Appellee Utility Associates, Inc. Digital
Ally, Inc. v. Utility Assocs., Inc., No. 2:14-cv-02262-CM, 2017 WL 1197561 (D.
Kan. Mar. 30, 2017). Exercising jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, we affirm.1
Background
This case concerns two companies who sell in-c

This appeal follows the trial on Drs. Crowley and Flores’s
(the Doctors) claims against EpiCept Corporation (EpiCept)
for breach of contract, breach of the implied covenant of good
faith and fair dealing, and fraud. The Doctors’ claims arise
from their assignment to EpiCept of two patents for a non-
FDA approved drug (referred to as “NP-2”) and EpiCept’s
failure to develop

Leesa Jacobson and Peter Ragan (collectively, Appellants) filed this suit to challenge their exclusion from an enforcement zone set up around a Border Patrol checkpoint area near their homes in rural Arizona. Before any discovery occurred, the district court granted summary judgment to the Defendants-Appellees (Appellees). We vacate and remand for further proceedings.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDUR

Plaintiff Peter A. Folkens (“Folkens”) alleges that Defendant Robert T. Wyland (“Wyland”) infringed on his pen and ink depiction of two dolphins crossing underwater. Folkens contends that Wyland’s depiction of an underwater scene infringes on his drawing by copying the crossing dolphins, and that the similar element of two dolphins crossing underwater is protectable under copyright law, entitling

Doyle Lowther, William J. Doyle, John A. Lowther and Chris W. Cantrell; Gomez
Trial Attorneys, John H. Gomez and Deborah S. Dixon; Niddrie Addams Fuller, Rupa G.
Singh for Real Parties in Interest Anthony Shamrell and Daryl Rysdyk.
In this writ proceeding, we decide an issue of apparent first impression: Does the
Supreme Court's analysis of the admissibility of expert opinion evide

To reduce the number of no-fault evictions of families with children and educators
during the school year, the City and County of San Francisco and the San Francisco
Board of Supervisors (collectively, the City) barred such evictions. The trial court
concluded state law preempted this ordinance and the City appeals. We agree with the
City that the ordinance is not preempted, and re

BMG Rights Management (US) LLC (“BMG”), which owns copyrights in musical compositions, filed this suit alleging copyright infringement against Cox Communications, Inc. and CoxCom, LLC (collectively, “Cox”), providers of high-speed Internet access. BMG seeks to hold Cox contributorily liable for infringement of BMG’s copyrights by subscribers to Cox’s Internet service. Following extensive discovery

[¶1] Two Wyoming citizens sought to challenge legislation that authorized two
construction projects while maintaining a degree of legislative control which the citizens
contend violate the Wyoming Constitution. They also alleged a pattern of letting state
contracts without competitive bidding or required safeguards, contrary to the Wyoming
Constitution and laws. They sought to amen

7 Appellants were employees of the Rensselaer County Jail. Their medical
8 records were secretly accessed without their permission by at least one other
9 employee at the Jail. They sued in the United States District Court for the
10 Northern District of New York, alleging violations of their right to privacy in
11 health information under the Fourteenth Amendment and of the Comput

San Francisco, CA - Uber Agreed To Pay Waymo $245 Million in Urber Stock To Settle

Waymo, LLC sured Uber Technologies, Inc. on patent infringement and theft of trade secret theories claiming that Urber bought Otto, which Waymo claimed had obtained technology relating to self-driving vehicles as a result of Otto's owner downloading Google technology files before leaving to found Otto.

¶1 This case comes to us on certification from the United States District Court for the District of Utah. UTAH R. APP. P. 41. The certified questions are as follows:
1. Is the Free Speech Clause of the Utah Constitution self-executing? 2. If question 1 is answered in the affirmative, what are the elements of a claim brought under the clause? 3. Does an employee who receives notice that his or

Plaintiff Leapers, Inc. appeals the district court’s entry of
summary judgment for Defendant Sun Optics USA in Plaintiff’s case alleging trade dress
infringement under the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1051, et seq. For the reasons set forth below,
we VACATE the district court’s judgment and REMAND the case for further proceedings.
BACKGROUND
Plaintiff Leapers, Inc. makes adjustable

In November 2014, Tennessee voters approved an
amendment to the Tennessee Constitution making clear that the Constitution is not to be
construed as securing or protecting a right to abortion or requiring funding of an abortion.
Understandably, the amendment was a matter of no small controversy. In fact, more votes were
cast in favor of and opposition to the amendment than were cast

At trial, the evidence showed that Robinson and another man committed an
armed robbery at a Whataburger. Surveillance video showed Robinson holding a
backpack while the other man pointed a shotgun at the cashier’s head. Robinson and
the other man fled when an alarm sounded, and Robinson was apprehended shortly
thereafter. The jury found Robinson guilty of aggravated robbery.

David Miller was convicted and sentenced to
death for the 1981 murder of Lee Standifer. His sentence was upheld by the Tennessee Supreme
Court and we affirmed the dismissal of his § 2254 habeas petition. Seeking to revisit his
ineffective-assistance-of-trial-counsel (IATC) claim in light of Martinez v. Ryan, 566 U.S. 1
(2012), and Trevino v. Thaler, 569 U.S. 413 (2013), Miller now

In November 2014, Tennessee voters approved an
amendment to the Tennessee Constitution making clear that the Constitution is not to be
construed as securing or protecting a right to abortion or requiring funding of an abortion.
Understandably, the amendment was a matter of no small controversy. In fact, more votes were
cast in favor of and opposition to the amendment than were cast