«Although the government principally advanced a theory that Dean Skelos's arrangement for or participation in certain meeting
constituted circumstantial evidence of a quid pro quo for legislative votes, it also argued in the alternative that the meetings themselves satisfied the official - act requirement,» the panel wrote in their decision.
Supporting a contention by RE / MAX that the marks
constituted infringement, the court said the RE / MAX marks had strong recognition for the services connected with them and that there was
circumstantial evidence that Trend Setter intended to have its materials resemble RE / MAX's.