Sentences with phrase «federal circuit court makes»

Sometimes the Family Court or Federal Circuit Court makes an order or an injunction that is inconsistent with the state or territory order (see Sections 68P and 68Q of the Family Law Act).

Not exact matches

In the ruling, which was made public just before Christmas, the U.S. Federal Circuit Court of Appeals in Washington said the government was wrong to deny a trademark to «The Slants,» an Asian - American band.

But last month, the Second U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals reversed the convictions, ruling that jury instructions hadn't reflected a later U.S. Supreme Court finding that narrowed federal corruption laws, requiring officials to exercise power instead of just make a phone call or set up a meeting.

The law, known as the Gun - Free School Zones Act, was struck down last fall by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, which said that Congress exceeded its authority under the commerce clause of the Constitution when it made gun possession near public or private schools a federal offense.

«It is important for the U.S. Supreme Court to take this case, as the Ninth Circuit opinion ignores 20 years of precedents on special education law and represents yet another example of a federal agency exceeding its authority over educational decision making,» NSBA Executive Director Thomas J. Gentzel said.

The case asks the Court to hear and overturn a ruling by the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals (Kentucky, Michigan, Ohio, Tennessee) that makes mandatory reporters of suspected child abuse vulnerable to federal claims brought by an alleged abuser.

This follows an order from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit which allowed Judge Koh to make the decision.

For example, the federal appeals court in Chicago (7th Circuit) will still make its own determination on the appeals for the Cook County and Chicago ordinances and will not be required to follow the decisions on appeal in Phoenix and New York because they are in a different cCircuit) will still make its own determination on the appeals for the Cook County and Chicago ordinances and will not be required to follow the decisions on appeal in Phoenix and New York because they are in a different circuitcircuit.

That shift was made possible by the 1965 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals decision, which, for the first time, granted environmental litigants standing to sue in federal cCourt of Appeals decision, which, for the first time, granted environmental litigants standing to sue in federal courtcourt.

Women also make up around one - third of active Circuit Court of Appeals judges and a quarter of Federal Court judges.

I think it's going to go to the Supreme Court because the Federal Circuit has made a very controversial decision.»

Qualcomm makes some public interest arguments about the importance of protecting intellectual property, but it probably knows that it's preaching to the converted when telling the Federal Circuit about the importance of IP to innovation, and focuses on making an argument that characterizes Judge Posner's decision to deny injunctive relief as inconsistent with Supreme Court and Federal Circuit precedent.

Whether the Ninth Circuit erred in upholding the EPA's assertion of authority to second - guess a permitting decision made by the State of Alaska — which had been delegated permitting authority under the Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. § § 7401 et seq. — in conflict with decisions of this Court and other federal courts of appeals establishing the division of federal - state jurisdiction under the Act and similar statutory programs.

Mr. Cacace, who argued the appeal, added: «The Federal Circuit made it clear that the America Invents Act is not a one - way ticket to federal court for defendants who assert patent infringement counterclaims in an attempt to create federal jurisdiction where there iFederal Circuit made it clear that the America Invents Act is not a one - way ticket to federal court for defendants who assert patent infringement counterclaims in an attempt to create federal jurisdiction where there ifederal court for defendants who assert patent infringement counterclaims in an attempt to create federal jurisdiction where there ifederal jurisdiction where there is none.

Thanks to BeSpacific, I've learned that the U.S. 7th Circuit federal court of appeal is making oral arguments available by podcast.

In addition, although the Federal Circuit has not addressed the broader issue, patent owners should expect that short of actual disclaimer, all statements made during AIA post grant proceedings, including statements in expert reports, will be considered «intrinsic» evidence that a district court may consider, along with the patent specification and prosecution history, in conducting claim construction.

In a case of first impression, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has held that a patent owner's statements made in a preliminary statement during an AIA inter partes review (IPR) proceeding may create prosecution disclaimer during subsequent federal court litigaCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has held that a patent owner's statements made in a preliminary statement during an AIA inter partes review (IPR) proceeding may create prosecution disclaimer during subsequent federal court litiFederal Circuit has held that a patent owner's statements made in a preliminary statement during an AIA inter partes review (IPR) proceeding may create prosecution disclaimer during subsequent federal court litifederal court litigacourt litigation.

Have they already given up on the Federal Circuit and already begun to make a case for a Supreme Court review?

In that post I expressed hopes that Samsung would take the design patent issues in that case to the Supreme Court, and a filing made by Samsung with the Federal Circuit on Wednesday (a motion to stay execution of a mandate, i.e., to prevent Apple from physically collecting money before the case is really over) now states clearly that this will happen (this post continues below the document):

A recent decision from the Court of Appeals for the 5th Federal Circuit has made this strategy more difficult for employers to implement.

On Thursday night, DOJ, in a pending labor dispute in a federal appeals court in Philadelphia, offered a glimpse of legal arguments the government could make in asking the full D.C. Circuit to overturn the three - judge panel decision in Noel Canning v. NLRB.

The high court rarely reviewed Federal Circuit decisions, making the lower court the de facto «Supreme Court of patent law.&rcourt rarely reviewed Federal Circuit decisions, making the lower court the de facto «Supreme Court of patent law.&rcourt the de facto «Supreme Court of patent law.&rCourt of patent law.»

Heartland argues that the Federal Courts Jurisdiction and Venue Clarification Act of 2011 effectively repealed the Federal Circuit's 1990 ruling in VE Holding v. Johnson Gas Appliance that patent suits can be brought anywhere a defendant makes sales.

I think it's going to go to the Supreme Court because the Federal Circuit has made a very controversial decision.»

Unfortunately, the Federal Circuit has narrowly interpreted «exceptional cases» to make such fee shifting nearly impossible for defendants who defeat bad patent troll claims (which is the subject of the current Supreme Court case, Octane v. ICON).

Even with the «discounted» financial damage, Apple is still the clear winner, as the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (a specialized body that handles patent appeals) made it clear that a range of Samsung's devices infringed several of Apple's patented inventions for the iPhone.

The panel's decision disregards long - standing Supreme Court and Federal Circuit law that makes it the judge's role to construe patents.

(1) The Rules of Court may make provision for or in relation to dispute resolution processes carried out under an order made, or direction given, by the Federal Circuit Court of Australia under this Act or another law of the Commonwealth.

If there is no agreement and your application will be for determination by the Court, then one party can start court proceedings by filing an Initiating Application to ask the Federal Circuit Court of Australia or the Family Court of Australia to make orCourt, then one party can start court proceedings by filing an Initiating Application to ask the Federal Circuit Court of Australia or the Family Court of Australia to make orcourt proceedings by filing an Initiating Application to ask the Federal Circuit Court of Australia or the Family Court of Australia to make orCourt of Australia or the Family Court of Australia to make orCourt of Australia to make orders.

(c) the power to make orders in relation to discovery, inspection and production of documents in the possession, power or custody of a party to proceedings in the Federal Circuit Court of Australia or of any other person;

Note: Family consultants who are not officers of the Federal Circuit Court of Australia may be appointed under regulations made under the Family Law Act 1975.

(a) make orders of such kinds, including interlocutory orders, as the Federal Circuit Court of Australia thinks appropriate; and

Jessica wants to make an application to the Federal Circuit Court for parenting orders.

If the family can't come to an agreement, a Federal Circuit Court judge may hear the case and make a determination.

The Federal Circuit Court of Australia (Consequential Amendments) Bill 2012 made consequential amendments to Commonwealth legislation to reflect the name change of the Court and the title of the judicial officers.

There are now more than 60 judges who make up the Federal Circuit Court, including the first Aboriginal man to become a Federal judicial officer in Australia, Judge Matthew Myers AM, appointed in 2011.

This fact sheet will give you information about whether you are eligible to make an application for financial matters in the Family Court or Federal Circuit Court.

(5) Before standard Rules of Court are made for the purposes of subsection (3) or (4), the Family Court must consult the Federal Circuit Court of Australia.

(1) If a proceeding of a kind specified in regulations made for the purposes of this subsection is pending in the Family Court, the Family Court must, before going on to hear and determine the proceeding, transfer the proceeding to the Federal Circuit Court of Australia.

(3) The arbitrator must not make an award in the arbitration before the judge or Federal Circuit Court of Australia has either:

(3) The standard Rules of Court may make provision in relation to the transfer of proceedings to the Federal Circuit Court of Australia under subsection (1).

(7) If an order is made under subsection (1), the Family Court may make such orders as it considers necessary pending the disposal of the proceeding by the Federal Circuit Court of Australia.

(2) If a proceeding is transferred under subsection (1), the Family Court may make such orders as it considers necessary pending the disposal of the proceedings by the Federal Circuit Court of Australia.

(iv) Rules of Court made for the purposes of paragraph 87 (1)(j) of the Federal Circuit Court of Australia Act 1999; or