Case law

CBS Corp. v. Federal Communication Commission

535 F.3d 167 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Aug 6, 2008

of a topless woman running on the beach, and several scenes of a nude female corpse, with the breasts clearly exposed.” … established meaning of these terms.

Rossman v. Fleet Bank (R.I.) National Ass'n

280 F.3d 384 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Feb 8, 2002

An asterisk directed the recipient to a note that stated, "See the TERMS OF PRE- QUALIFIED OFFER and CONSUMER INFORMATION for detailed rate and other information." … The common practice of offering cards with low "teaser" rates would effectively be rendered immune from disclosure requirements.

Sierra v. Romaine

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Oct 29, 2003

We exercise plenary review over the district court’s legal conclusions and ordinarily would review its findings of fact under a clearly erroneous standard. See Ruggiano v. Reish, 307 F.3d 121, 126 (3d Cir. 2002). … This language . . . is part of the court’s analysis of whether or not IIRIRA ‘clearly’ withdraws habeas jurisdiction.

Schwartz v. Weinberg

197 F. App'x 182 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Sep 19, 2006

Rule 9006(b)(3) clearly provides that the time for “taking action” under Rule 4007(c) may be enlarged “only to the extent and under the conditions stated” in Rule 4007(c). … This court, however, has never held that those rules are “jurisdictional” or otherwise immune from tolling based on equitable principles. Schwartz bases her contention solely upon In re Rowland, 275 B.R. 209 (Bankr.

Elisa Diaz v. City of Philadelphia

565 F. App'x 102 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · May 2, 2014

To establish a prima facie case of discrimination under the ADA, Diaz must show that “‘(1) [she] is a disabled person within the meaning of the ADA; (2) [she] is otherwise qualified to perform the essential functions of … And the patient states clearly . . . that she had [PTSD], was on medications that did not allow her to be able to work, and for that reason Beckwith could not have put her back to any duty other than no duty.”).

United States v. Carlos Maldonado

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jan 8, 2021

First, we consider whether defense counsel has established that he or she “has thoroughly examined the record in search of appealable issues” and “explain[ed] why the issues are frivolous.” United States v. … If we are satisfied with the attorney’s brief, we then undertake an independent 1 The District Court clearly had subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3231.

United States v. Karen Hawkins

409 F. App'x 507 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Dec 15, 2010

Instead, she related her personal knowledge of Linn’s banking habits in order to establish that she had never known Linn to make such a large withdrawal. … This determination is not clearly erroneous. First of all, in order to qualify for a vulnerable victim enhancement, a defendant need only impact one vulnerable victim.

Berkley Specialty Insurance Co v. Masterforce Construction Corp

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · May 11, 2023

define an “occurrence” as “an accident, including continuous or repeated exposure to substantially the same general harmful conditions.” 3 The parties disagree over whether the property damage that the Brandts sustained qualifies … A judgment on the pleadings may not be “granted unless the movant clearly establishes there are no material issues of fact, and he is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.” Sikirica v. Nationwide Ins.

United States v. Fumo

655 F.3d 288 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Aug 23, 2011

Prior to the trial, Judge Yohn had found Contino to be “well qualified” as an expert and ruled that it was “appropriate for him to talk about the Ethics Act.” (J.A. 431). … In so doing, the Government was not able to argue that the Court’s findings were clearly erroneous. .

Zambardino v. Schweiker

668 F.2d 194 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Dec 28, 1981

. § 416.1151 (1979) 14 After an AFDC recipient begins receiving SSI benefits, states must terminate AFDC payments to maintain a qualified program eligible for federal funds. 42 U.S.C. § 602 (a)(24) (1976). … Congress clearly intended to change existing law regarding certain types of state assistance to individuals in small public institutions.

United States v. Trala

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Oct 26, 2004

respective positions of police about his name and the source of Trala and Prince when Prince made the the money in his car, and those statements challenged statements, the jury could only were clearly … This is much stronger convictions qualify as crimes of violence.” evidence of consciousness of guilt than in See U.S.S.G. § 4B1.1 (“A defendant is a Levy, where we held that “the use

In Re: Exide Tech

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Sep 19, 2008

Pacor clearly holds that in the event of such an indemnification obligation, “related to” jurisdiction might exist. … Accordingly, claims between non-debtors may be related to a bankruptcy case, but generally do not qualify as core proceedings under 28 U.S.C. § 157(b).

In Re Federal-Mogul Global, Inc. Daimlerchrysler Corporation Ford Motor Company General Motors Corporation, in Re Federal-Mogul Global, Inc. Hennessy Industries, Inc., in Re Federal-Mogul Global, Inc. Mg Rover Group, Inc. Nissan North America, Inc. Volkswagen of America, Inc. Volkswagen Ag Mercedes-Benz Usa, LLC Bmw North America, Inc. Volvo Cars North America, Inc. Harley-Davidson Motor Company Group, Inc., in Re Federal-Mogul Global, Inc. Salvo Auto Parts Holman Enterprises, Inc. B.F. Goodrich, Inc., in Re Federal-Mogul Global, Inc. Honeywell International, Inc., in Re Federal-Mogul Global, Inc. British Motor Cars Distributors, Inc., in Re Federal-Mogul Global, Inc. Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors, in Re Federal-Mogul Global, Inc. International Truck and Engine Corp.

300 F.3d 368 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jul 31, 2002

Reviewability 33 It is a well-established rule in this circuit (and generally) that "`orders transferring venue are not immediately appealable.'" Sunbelt Corp. v. … Hermansdorfer, 423 U.S. 336, 345-46 , 96 S.Ct. 584 , 46 L.Ed.2d 542 (1976), that only remand orders based on grounds specified in § 1447(c) are immune from review under § 1447(d).

Ares Trading SA v. Dyax Corp

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Sep 3, 2024

PD-L1 prevents the immune system from attacking cells to which it is attached. When PD-L1 is attached to cancer cells, it shields them from attack. … Dyax’s counterclaim regarding the ’298 Patent’s inventor- ship clearly arises under the federal patent laws, which create the cause of action for this claim.

Windfelder v. May Department Stores Co.

93 F. App'x 351 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Feb 26, 2004

Kaufmann’s reasons for Windfelder’s demotion and termination were consistent, as it clearly documented and communicated to Windfelder the reasons for his “marginal” reviews. … W indfelder cannot establish pretext by a mere drop in his performance evaluations from 1996 to 1997-99. Ezold, 983 F.2d at 528.

Consolidated Edison Co. v. Federal Power Commission

271 F.2d 942 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Nov 3, 1959

It is true that the gas, under the agreement, was not to be sold and it was established that it was to be used to fire boilers. … “Except in the cases governed by the prorisos contained in subsection (c) of this section, a certificate shall be issued to any qualified applicant therefor, authorizing the whole or any part of the operation, sale, service

Taylor v. Horn

Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Sep 20, 2007

Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984), which “qualifies as clearly established Federal law, as determined by the Supreme Court of the United States.’” 9 Williams, 529 U.S. at 391 (internal quotation marks omitted). … —that he clearly understood the consequences of asserting that were no mitigating circumstances.

Century 21 Real Estate Corporation Coldwell Banker Real Estate Corporation Era Franchise Systems, Inc. v. Lendingtree, Inc.

425 F.3d 211 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Oct 11, 2005

Clearly, the mechanic is referring to another’s product, but does so in order to describe what he does. … The Supreme Court in KP Permanent MakeUp clearly established that it was plaintiffs burden in a classic fair use case to prove likelihood of confusion.

Kirlew v. Attorney General

267 F. App'x 125 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Feb 27, 2008

Kirlew first argues that the evidence establishing the Conspiracy Conviction violates the requirement of Woodby v. … We reject each of these arguments as the documents submitted by the government, taken together, clearly and unequivocally establish that Kirlew was convicted of the Conspiracy Conviction.

Peter Brownstein v. Tina Lindsay

742 F.3d 55 · Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Jan 29, 2014

Mich. 2005) 31 (holding that registration of a song qualified as express repudiation). … While § 201.7(b) clearly enumerates the requirements for cancellation of registration, § 201.7(a) also clearly delegates that authority to the Copyright Office. 37 C.F.R. § 201.7(a) (“Cancellation is an action taken by the