Cases

JERRY E. SMITH, Circuit Judge: Twenty-six states (the “states”) are challenging the government’s1 Deferred Action for Parents of Americans and Lawful Permanent Residents program (“DAPA”) as violative of the Administrative Procedure Act (“APA”) and the Take Care Clause of the Constitution. The district court determined that the states are likely to succeed on their, procedural APA claim, so it tem

*1047MEMORANDUM AND ORDER LEE H. ROSENTHAL, District Judge. This is a consumer class action certified under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(b)(3) for settlement. The class is large — over one hundred million payment-card1 holders — and dispersed across the country. Despite a vigorous notice campaign, only eleven valid

LYNCH, Circuit Judge. This is an appeal from a decision decer-tifying a class action brought by and on behalf of wireless phone customers of Cellular One, the doing-business name of Southwestern Bell Mobile Systems, Inc. The putative class members are Massachusetts and New Hampshire residents who were charged for incoming calls despite having signed a standard form contract, used

The opinion of the court was delivered by ANTELL, P.J.A.D. On May 1, 1990, MCI Telecommunications Corporation (hereinafter “MCI”) petitioned the Board of Regulatory Commissioners, then known as the Board of Public Utilities (hereinafter “Board”), to authorize intraLATA competition1 in New Jersey, and in connection therewith to approve the addition of certain services to MCI’s int

ACCEPTED 15-25-00020-CV FIFTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS AUSTIN, TEXAS 4/17/2025 7:29 PM CHRISTOPHER A. PRINE

ACCEPTED 15-25-00109-CV FIFTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS AUSTIN, TEXAS 6/23/2025 5:08 PM NO. __-__-______-CV CHRISTOPHER A. PRINE

874 F.Supp. 1080 (1994) FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION, Plaintiff, v. AMERICAN STANDARD CREDIT SYSTEMS, INC., et al., Defendants. No. CV 93-2623 LGB (JRx). United States District Court, C.D. California. August 8, 1994. *1081 *1082 Rolando Berrelez, Judith Dixon, Federal Trade Com'n Div. of Credit Pr

MEMORANDUM OPINION COLLEEN KOLLAR-KOTELLY, District Judge. As part of the Improving Head Start for School Readiness Act of 2007, Congress instructed the Defendants in this action, the United States Department of Health and Human Services (“HHS”) and Kathleen Sebelius, Secretary of HHS (collectively, “Defendants” or “the Secretary”), to promulgate regulation

ACCEPTED 03-14-00706-CV 5038192 THIRD COURT OF APPEALS AUSTIN, TEXAS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA THE ATLANTA CHANNEL, INC., : : Plaintiff, : Civil Action No.: 15-1823 (RC) : : v. : Re Document Nos.: 269, 270,

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND FINAL JUDGMENT RODNEY. GILSTRAP, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE I. INTRODUCTION Plaintiff Iris Connex filed suit against eighteen manufacturers of smartphones and tablets, claiming each infringed the Plaintiffs only asset, U.S. Patent No. 6,177,950, which is entitled “Multifunction*832al portable telephone.”

HOTTEN, J. This appeal arises out of a breach of contract claim brought by appellant, CAS Severn, Inc. (hereinafter referred to as either “CAS” or “the company”), against the appellee, Andrew *687Await (“Await”), for failure to abide by a professional service agreement’s covenant not to compete. As discussed in more detail infra, CAS conten

394 F.Supp.2d 105 (2005) LIBERTY FUND, INC., Petitioner, v. Elaine CHAO, Secretary of Labor, et al. Respondents. Nos. CIV.A.04-0915 JDB, 05-142, 05-144, 05-145, 05-147, 05-148, 05-149, 05-150, 05-156, 05-258, 05-259, 05-260, 05-261, 05-262, 05-412. United States District Court, District of Columbia. September 30, 2005. *106

Opinion for the Court filed by Circuit Judge SILBERMAN. Dissenting opinion filed by Circuit Judge WALD. SILBERMAN, Circuit Judge: These three consolidated cases all involve questions regarding the jurisdiction of the district court to hear claims brought by Ayuda, Inc. (along with three other organizations that advise aliens and five unnamed aliens) to prevent the Immigration and Naturaliz

Opinion KLINE, P. J. This writ proceeding arises out of a class action alleging the sending of unsolicited advertisements to a telephone facsimile machine in violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act of 1991 (TCPA) (47 U.S.C. § 227(b)(1)(C)), which authorizes a private right of action in state court. (Id., § 227(b)(3).) Pe

352 F.Supp.2d 578 (2005) UNITED STATES v. EXTREME ASSOCIATES, INC., Robert Zicari, and Janet Romano, Defendants. Crim. No. 03-0203. United States District Court, W.D. Pennsylvania. January 20, 2005. *579 Stephen R. Kaufman, United States Attorney's Office, Pittsburgh, PA, for Plaintiff. Jennifer M. Kinsley, Sirkin, Pinales

EBEL, Circuit Judge. Southwestern Bell Telephone Company appeals from a jury verdict finding it guilty of monopolistic behavior in violation of Oklahoma state law and assessing damages of over $7 million, trebled to over $20 million. At issue is Southwestern Bell’s domination of the Oklahoma pay phone market, a market it legally monopolized, under the oversight of the Oklahoma Corporation Commission (OCC), until November 199

97 F.Supp.2d 96 (2000) NORTHERN LIGHT TECHNOLOGY, INC., Plaintiff, v. NORTHERN LIGHTS CLUB, et al., Defendants. No. CIV. A. 99-11664-DPW. United States District Court, D. Massachusetts. March 31, 2000. *97 *98 Bernard J. Bonn, III, Barry S. Pollack, Dechert, Price & Rhoads, Boston, for Pla

ACCEPTED 03-15-00348-CV 6616789 THIRD COURT OF APPEALS AUSTIN, TEXAS

THIS OPINION IS A PRECEDENT OF THE TTAB Hearing: Mailed: September 20, 2012 September 5, 2013 UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE _____ Trademark Trial and Appeal Board _____ Sh