Case law

Gould-National Batteries, Inc. v. Gulton Industries, Inc.

361 F.2d 912 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jun 17, 1966

It is an established axiom of the patent law that a device or method which would infringe if later than the disputed patent, anticipates if earlier. Chemical Construction Corp. v. … The claim must fall also because of its failure to meet the requirements of § 101; the electrolytic cell therein defined does not qualify as a patentable invention.

In Re: Karen A. Briscoe Alfred Lara Wanda T. Kizer Debra Alexander Rhonda Allen Mary Green Glenda D. Abbott and Leslie Bales

448 F.3d 201 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · May 15, 2006

To qualify for an intermediate opt-out, class members had to take an echocardiogram and have a qualified physician find a medically relevant severity of heart-valve regurgitation as defined by the Settlement Agreement. … As to the matter of tolling, therefore, petitioners have not clearly established that they were “prevented” from discovering their claims, exercising the opt-out right, and filing suit against their physicians.

United States v. Rafael Rodriguez

342 F.3d 296 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Sep 4, 2003

Note 3(C) to U.S.S.G. § 3B1.2 clearly states: The determination whether to apply subsection (a) [minimal participant] or subsection (b) [minor participant], or an intermediate adjustment, involves a determination that is … law that a defendant who cannot provide corroboration for his statements can never meet the minor participant burden of proof would be tantamount to saying that those actors with the least knowledge would never be able to qualify

Pens. Plan Guide (Cch) P 23953q Gilbert "Buddy" Dial, Plaintiff/counter v. Nfl Player Supplemental Disability Plan, Defendant/counterclaimant/third-Party v. Janice Marye, Third-Party

174 F.3d 606 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · May 7, 1999

Third, an award of attorneys' fees in the instant case would deter other administrators from straining to justify an interpretation of a QDRO that is clearly inconsistent with other provisions in the order. … With the establishment of the Bert Bell/Pete Rozelle Plan and the Disability Plan in 1993, it became apparent that this belief was mistaken. Ms. Marie [sic ] discovered the existence of the additional property--Mr.

Richard Turzai v. City of Pittsburgh

457 F. App'x 115 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jan 13, 2012

The District Court found that, even if the plaintiff could establish a constitutional violation, the defendants were entitled to qualified immunity because the plaintiff did not set forth sufficient evidence to show that … We need not discuss Turzai’s qualified immunity argument because the plaintiff failed to show probable cause was lacking and, therefore, cannot establish a constitutional violation by any individual defendant.

Conry v. Baltimore & O. R. Co.

209 F.2d 422 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Dec 22, 1953

In addition there was ample evidence which if believed established constructive notice to appellant of the condition. … Whether the expert was properly qualified again was for the trial court. R. C. Graham, the expert, possessed over fifty years’ experience with old land and title records in that vicinity.

Gerald B. Shreiber v. Robert A. Mastrogiovanni the Internal Revenue Service Gerald B. Shreiber

214 F.3d 148 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · May 31, 2000

The government does argue that Shreiber failed to allege a cognizable constitutional violation, and that Mastrogiovanni is entitled to qualified immunity. … Even if Shreiber had alleged the comments as a separate cause of action, the comments would not necessarily establish a constitutional violation. See, e.g., Emmons v.

Donald Jacobs v. County of Bucks

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jul 10, 2023

III For the foregoing reasons, we will affirm. 17 Because Jacobs has not shown he was prejudiced by McKevitt and Khan’s failure to assert qualified immunity as a defense in their answer, the District … Roquet, 858 F.3d 180, 188 (3d Cir. 2017), and because Jacobs fails to “make out a violation of a constitutional right,” McKevitt and Khan are entitled to qualified immunity, Karns v.

United States v. Shiheem Amos

88 F.4th 446 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Dec 14, 2023

One such exception to the warrant re- quirement was established in Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968). … We explained that one suspect “clearly submitted” when he “turned to face the police car and placed his hands on the vehicle in response to [the officer’s] demand.” Id. at 246.

Government of the Virgin Islands v. Micha Williams, Government of the Virgin Islands v. Angel De Jesus

476 F.2d 771 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Mar 28, 1973

. *594 Since a juror who is regularly drawn and selected is presumed, in the absence of some showing to the contrary, to be unbiased and otherwise qualified and competent to serve and since, as we have seen, the mere fact … The ingrafting into the criminal procedure of a novel practice like that here disclosed ought not be permitted, except in the face of a situation clearly showing the bias, prejudice, and lack of impartiality of the juror.

Ronald J. Srein and R.J. Srein Corp. v. Frankford Trust Company, N/k/a Key Trust Company

323 F.3d 214 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Mar 13, 2003

Findings of the District Court and undisputed evidence establish that: Ronald J. Srein is the sole stockholder and only employee of R.J. Srein Corporation. … Srein Corporation engaged Eagle Retirement and Investment Planning as Trustee of an ERISA qualified Money Purchase Pension Plan.

Debro S. Abdul-Akbar v. Roderick R. Mckelvie

239 F.3d 307 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jan 29, 2001

At all events, we doubt whether the allegations in Appellant's S 1983 Complaint suffice to establish such an ongoing danger. … This Appellant has clearly abused the IFP system, filing some 200 cases, most without merit.

181 South Inc. v. Fischer

454 F.3d 228 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jul 18, 2006

There, the Court held that “the Twenty-first Amendment does not qualify the constitutional prohibition against laws abridging the freedom of speech embodied in the First Amendment.” Id. at 516. … Rather, it only prohibits such activity from taking place on the premises of liquor-licensed establishments.

Haines v. Liggett Group Inc.

975 F.2d 81 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Sep 4, 1992

We agree that petitioners have no other “adequate means to attain the [desired] relief,” and accordingly we conclude that they have satisfied the first prerequisite in qualifying for mandamus relief. … that the finding is not clearly wrong (manifestly erroneous). 365 So.2d at 1333 .

Gibbs v. Air Canada

810 F.2d 1529 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Apr 2, 1987

The indemnity provision itself clearly does not indicate such an intent. Cf. … Grammatical construction of contracts generally requires that a qualifying phrase be construed as referring to its nearest antecedent. Wright & Seaton, Inc. v. Prescott, 420 So.2d 623, 629 (Fla.App.1982).

United States v. Juozas Kungys

793 F.2d 516 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jun 20, 1986

Although the government possesses a high standard of proof, “a certificate of citizenship is not immune from challenge.” Kowalchuk, supra, 773 F.2d at 493 . … Because that status, once granted, cannot lightly be taken away, the Government has a strong and legitimate interest in ensuring that only qualified persons are granted citizenship.

United States v. Anthony J. Pivorotto, John Robert Woods. John Robert Woods

986 F.2d 669 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Feb 22, 1993

Conversely, both tests account for the fact that if holding a new decision non-retroactive would clearly result in an egregious injustice, then retroactivity is appropriate. … Finally, the government contends that sovereign immunity prevents Woods from recovering money from the government. See infra note 23 (discussing the sovereign immunity and Tucker Act issues). 6 .

Geib v. New York State Teamsters Conference Pension & Retirement Fund

758 F.2d 973 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Apr 9, 1985

The statute clearly permits the use of a normal retirement age less than 65, see, e.g., Janowski v. … This report replaced a previous one that did not include the provision for an earlier retirement age established by the plan. See H.Rep.

United States v. Carl Jackson, A/K/A "Better Days", Carl Jackson

879 F.2d 85 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Aug 3, 1989

Beros, 833 F.2d 455, 460 (3d Cir.1987) (citations omitted). *88 In Beros , however, we qualified this general principle by holding that where the complexity of a case or other factors create the potential for confusion as … In a supplemental memorandum to this Court, the government argues that the testimony established that Jackson had the requisite authority over thirteen people.

United States v. Michael Henry Harrison, A/K/A Emmanuel Henry Harrison, III Michael Henry Harrison

357 F.3d 314 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Feb 6, 2004

Under these guidelines, handing out pornographic leaflets would be “distribution,” but clearly not a “transmission” by computer. III. … This ease is heightened by an offender’s ability to find a suitable partner in a child pornography “chat room,” with whom the offender may then trade anonymous emails in order to establish terms for the sale or barter of