When federal prosecutors focus their attention on high profile misconduct that is not an obvious violation of federal criminal law, they often cannot resist the attractions of broadly worded "catch-all" fraud statutes. From time to time, however, the U.S. Supreme Court has pushed back on efforts to further expand the boundaries of these statutes, leading to reversals of some well-publicized criminal convictions.
Romag Fasteners, Inc. v. Fossil, Inc. The Supreme Court, settling a circuit split, held that, although highly important, willfulness is not a prerequisite for a trademark infringement plaintiff to obtain a profits award.
On May 14, 2020, the U.S. Supreme Court resolved a circuit split, finding that any preclusion of litigation defenses must comply with traditional res judicata principles, and ruling that Lucky Brand was not precluded from asserting its defenses in its long-standing trademark litigation against Marcel Fashions Group
The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that individual states are free to commit copyright infringement. The Court held that Congress attempted to abrogate states' sovereign immunity in an unconstitutional manner when enacting the Copyright Remedy Clarification Act of 1990 (CRCA).
Federal courts should "turn to state law to resolve" a "fight over a tax refund," held a unanimous U.S. Supreme Court in Rodriquez v. FDIC (In re United W Bancorp., Inc.).
High Court Rejects Application of Bob Roberts Rule Federal courts should "turn to state law to resolve" a "fight over a tax refund," held a unanimous U.S. Supreme Court in Rodriquez v. FDIC (In re United W Bancorp., Inc.)
In a recent, unanimous opinion authored by Justice Ginsburg, the U.S. Supreme Court affirmed lower court decisions holding that a bankruptcy court order denying a motion for relief from the automatic stay constitutes a final order that must be appealed within the time provided under Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure 8002.
In 2013, the PTO adopted a new policy under which any party commencing a de novo proceeding challenging a PTO decision would be responsible to pay a pro rata share of the salaries of the government attorneys working on the matter. On Dec. 11, 2019, the U.S. Supreme Court rejected the PTO's new interpretation of the Patent Act and held that the American Rule, a centuries-old principle under which each party bears its own attorneys' fees, does apply to this statute.
In Fourth Estate Public Benefit Corp. v. Wall-Street.com LLC, the U.S. Supreme Court held that, under 17 U.S.C. §411(a), "registration occurs, and a copyright claimant may commence an infringement suit, when the Copyright Office registers a copyright" — that is, acts on a registration application, rather than when an applicant delivers the registration materials to the Copyright Office.
The U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari in Liu v. Securities and Exchange Commission to address a question that, until fairly recently, seemed clear: whether the SEC has authority to obtain disgorgement in civil actions to enforce the federal securities laws.
© Copyright 2026 ALM Global, LLC trading as Centellic.
Advertise with Us Customer Support Terms of Service Privacy Policy
