Plaintiff Evergreen Partnering Group, Inc. ("Evergreen") appeals from a judgment of the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts dismissing its Second Amended Complaint ("complaint"). The complaint alleges that defendants-appellees, polystyrene food service packaging manufacturers and two trade associations, refused in concert to deal with Evergreen in a recycling business m

In this copyright infringement case, Enterprise Management Limited, Inc.,1 and Mary Lippitt (collectively Lippitt) appeal from a summary judgment in favor of Donald Warrick. Lippitt contends, contrary to the district court’s holding, she demonstrated a prima facie case of copyright infringement. We agree.

FACTUAL BACKGROUND

This case involves a diagram Lippitt created in the course

Petitioner Lyle E. Craker, a professor at the University of Massachusetts, seeks review of an order from the Drug Enforcement Administration ("DEA") denying his application for registration to cultivate marijuana for medical research. After review of the administrative record, we deny the petition.

I. Statutory Landscape

In an effort to consolidate the nation's drug laws and

The “exclusive rights� that a copyright owner has “to distribute copies. . . of [a] copyrighted work,� 17 U. S. C. §106(3), are qualified by the application of several limitations set out in §§107 through 122, including the “first sale� doctrine, which provides that “the owner of a particular copy or phono record lawfully made under this title . . . isentitled, without the authori

This is a copyright infringement suit over a seven-second clip of Ed Sullivan’s introduction of the Four Seasons on The Ed Sullivan Show. Appellees Dodger Productions, Inc. and Dodger Theatricals, Ltd. (collectively “Dodger�) used the clip in their musical about the Four Seasons, Jersey Boys, to mark a historical point in the band’s career.

Appellant SOFA Entertainment, Inc. (“SOF

An Abbey of the Benedictine Order of the Catholic Church challenges as unconstitutional rules issued by the Louisiana Board of Funeral Directors granting funeral homes an exclusive right to sell caskets. The district court enjoined their enforcement, finding that they deny equal protection and due process of law.

I.

The thirty-eight monks of St. Joseph Abbey earn their way in a p

This appeal and cross-appeal concern a dispute over retail pricing practices by a fashion accessories company. Named plaintiff Sue O'Brien and a class of similarly situated consumers (O'Brien) sued the maker of Brighton handbags, other accessories, and luggage, defendant Leegin Creative Leather Products, Inc. (Brighton), alleging violations of the Kansas Restraint of Trade Act (KRTA), K.S.A. 50-10

This is an action brought by appellee, James A. Robinson, to enforce the judgment entered in his favor in Robinson v. Texas Workforce Commission and Tryco Enterprises, Inc., No. 2000-32376, in the 113th District Court of Harris County, Texas (“the FLSA suit�). Appellants, Tryco Enterprises, Inc. (“Tryco�), Sharon C. Dixon, James Dixon, Crown Staffing, Inc. (“Crown Staffing�), and Troy

The question presented is whether a single color may serve as a legally protected trademark in the fashion industry and, in particular, as the mark for a particular style of high fashion women’s footwear. Christian Louboutin, a designer of high-fashion women’s footwear and accessories, has since 1992 painted the “outsoles� of his women’s high-heeled shoes with a high-gloss red lacquer. I

Dr. George Cohlmia, a cardiovascular and thoracic surgeon in the Tulsa, Oklahoma area, sued St. John Medical Center (SJMC) alleging a number of federal and state antitrust and business tort claims.1 His claims followed SJMC’s suspension of his medical privileges after a pair of surgeries, one resulting in death and another in permanent disfigurement. In response, SJMC asserted an affirmative def

Defendant Southern California Edison (“Edison�) appeals from the judgment entered against it following a bench trial in which the court ruled that Edison was liable to Pacific Bell Telephone Company (“Pacific Bell�) for just compensation in Pacific Bell‟s cause of action for inverse condemnation. We affirm.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL SUMMARY

The relevant facts of this appeal ar

This appeal reads like a telenovela, a Spanish soap opera. It pits music celebrities, who make money by promoting themselves, against a gossip magazine, that makes money by publishing celebrity photographs, with a paparazzo, who apparently stole the disputed pictures, stuck in the middle.

Noelia Lorenzo Monge and Jorge Reynoso (“the couple�), Latin American celebrities, claim that Maya

Altech, Inc., a general contractor, contracted to build an intermediate school for the Pleasant Grove Independent School District (the Project). Endsley Electric, Inc., doing business as Industrial Power Systems or Industrial Power Systems, Inc., entered into a subcontract with Altech to provide the electrical and fire alarm work on the Project. In April 2010, shortly after the Project was complet

¶1 In 2010, the Oklahoma Legislature amended the Oklahoma Tax Code, 68 O.S. Supp. 2010 §2702(A)1 to require municipalities to contract with the State of Oklahoma through the Oklahoma Tax Commission (the Commission) to assess, collect and enforce municipal taxes. On June 1, 2010, prior to the amendment becoming effective on July 1, 2010, the plaintiff/appellee, City of Tulsa (City/Tulsa) contract

Plaintiffs appeal the dismissal of their case pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(1). The district court, following a hearing, found that the “filedrate doctrine� denied the court federal question subject-matter jurisdiction. The district court also found that the Public Utilities Commission of Ohio (“PUCO�) had exclusive jurisdiction over Defendants’ state-law claims, depriving the court

Hope for Families & Community Service, Inc. and others sued Macon County Greyhound Park, Inc., Milton McGregor and Macon County Sheriff David Warren on a civil conspiracy theory claiming that defendants wrongfully conspired to give Victoryland a monopoly on electronic bingo in the county.

Defendants denied wrongdoing.

¶1 This is a class action brought by a utility ratepayer against a rural electric distribution cooperative corporation and its trustees, and a rural electric generating and transmission cooperative corporation and its trustees. The ratepayers attack a wholesale power contract executed [792 P.2d 53] between the two cooperatives. We are called upon to determine whether summary judgment was properly

Appellant Rosetta Stone Ltd. appeals from an order, see Rosetta Stone Ltd. v. Google Inc., 730 F. Supp. 2d 531 (E.D. Va. 2010), granting summary judgment against Rosetta Stone on its claims against Appellee Google Inc. for trademark infringement, see 15 U.S.C. § 1114(1)(a); contributory and vicarious trademark infringement; and trademark dilution, see 15 U.S.C. § 1125(c)(1). Rosetta Stone also a

Plaintiffs, a putative class of retail cable and satellite television subscribers, appeal the dismissal of the third version of their complaint against television programmers (Programmers)1 and distributors (Distributors).2 The complaint alleged that Programmers’ practice of selling multi-channel cable packages violates Section 1 of the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1. In essence, plaintiffs seek to

This appeal presents issues of state law governing the powers of Illinois fire protection districts. Defendant-appellant Lisle-Woodridge Fire Protection District (the District) adopted an ordinance in 2009 requiring commercial buildings and multi-family residences to have fire alarms equipped with wireless radio technology that would send alarm signals directly to the central monitoring “boardâ€

Respondent University of Virginia, a state instrumentality, authorizes payments from its Student Activities Fund (SAF) to outside contractors for the printing costs of a variety of publications issued by student groups called "Contracted Independent Organizations" (CIOs). The SAF receives its money from mandatory student fees and is designed to support a broad range of extracurricular student acti

This case raises important issues regarding the doctrine of “copyright misuse� as it has developed in the wake of the technological revolution of the last 30 years. Plaintiff- Appellee, Apple Inc. (“Apple�), is one of the leading producers of innovative technological hardware and software that has spurred enormous consumer demand for ever evolving technology. The Defendant-Appellant, Psyst

This appeal arises out of a dispute between a city and a rural water district over their rights to serve customers in several recently annexed areas of Douglas County, Kansas. Rural Water District No. 4 (“Douglas-4� or “the District�) brought this suit against the city of Eudora under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging the City violated Douglas-4’s exclusive right to provide water service to cu

This is an appeal in an action brought under the Kansas Uniform Trade Secrets Act, K.S.A. 60-3320 et seq. The defendants, former employees of the plaintiff Progressive Products, Inc. (PPI), challenge the district court finding that they misappropriated protected trade secrets, and, on review before this court, they additionally challenge the remedial procedure that the Court of Appeals directed.

¶1 MACo Workers’ Compensation Trust (MACo) appeals from a determination of the Workers’ Compensation Court (WCC) that § 39-71-710, MCA, violates the Equal Protection Clause found in Article II, Section 4, of the Montana Constitution. We affirm.

¶2 We review the following issue on appeal:

¶3 Does the categorical denial of rehabilitation benefits to a workers’ compensation cl