Case law

Bassett v. Jensen

District Court, D. Massachusetts · May 11, 2020

The designs on the tabletops also qualify to the extent the color and placement of the stenciled designs are original to Bassett. See Star Athletica, L.L.C. v. … It found that “the principal four-to-five-second segment in which almost all of the poster is clearly visible, albeit in less than perfect focus, reenforced [sic] by the briefer segments

Timmins Software Corporation v. EMC Corporation

District Court, D. Massachusetts · Nov 24, 2020

Plaintiff argues this qualifies as “unfair acts and practices and . . . unfair methods of competition within the meaning of Massachusetts General Laws 93A.” Id. … Thus, Count III clearly meets the requirements of Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a)(2). IV.

Board of Trustees of the IUOE Local 4 Pension Fund v. Alongi

District Court, D. Massachusetts · Dec 7, 2022

Mem. at 5).4 Plaintiffs respond that defendant has failed to establish good cause because she did not diligently seek to amend. A. Fed. R. Civ. … Defendant’s proposed counterclaim for interference with rights is clearly part of the same case or controversy as the fiduciary-duty claim.

Krishnan v. Blueprint Healthcare LLC

District Court, D. Massachusetts · Sep 17, 2021

The Agreement clearly states in its “Service Compensation” clause that Krishnan assigned his professional fees to Blueprint, and in consideration thereof, is being paid the $150,000 base salary delineated in the Addendum … It is not in dispute that Krishnan qualified as an employee under the statute and that his compensation constituted a wage.

FWK Holdings LLC v. Shire PLC (Direct Purchaser Antitrust Class Action Complaint)

District Court, D. Massachusetts · Sep 24, 2019

The class proposed here is clearly ascertainable. “Rule 23 does not set forth a mere pleading standard. A party seeking class certification must affirmatively demonstrate his compliance with the Rule.” … “To meet the predominance requirement, the party seeking certification must show that ‘the fact of antitrust impact can be established through common proof’ and that ‘any resulting damages would likewise be established

In re Biogen Inc. Securities Litigation

193 F. Supp. 3d 5 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Jun 23, 2016

PML is an infection that is particularly dangerous for individuals with a weakened immune system. … “There is no set pattern of facts that will establish scienter; it is a case-by-case inquiry.” ACA Fin., 512 F.3d at 66.

Doe v. Cavanaugh

District Court, D. Massachusetts · Sep 22, 2020

The court ruled that A.M.’s note received First Amendment protection whether it qualified as “political” or not. Id. at 23-24. … Claimants bear the burden of establishing, “‘from the text of [the law] and from actual fact,’ that substantial overbreadth exists.” Virginia v.

Hightower v. City of Boston

822 F. Supp. 2d 38 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Sep 29, 2011

Finally, and most importantly, the statement in the Harrington Declaration upon which Hightower focuses in no way suggests that it would be futile for her to apply for any type of restricted permit that would clearly fall … Memo, D. 45 at 18 (“[t]he correct category for Hightower is simply, ‘law-abiding Bostonian fully qualified to possess firearms.’ All people in this category should expect to have their applications treated equally.

Eggiman v. Bank of America, N.A.

District Court, D. Massachusetts · Mar 27, 2023

The parties clearly have a contractual agreement covering the commercial conduct at issue in this case. … Compl. ¶ 157], as Eggiman suggests, is clearly an expansion of the express terms of the contract.

Greene v. State of Massachusetts

District Court, D. Massachusetts · Oct 16, 2020

She names eighteen defendants, although she does not clearly identify which claim is being asserted against each defendant. … “A person’s domicile is the place where he has his true, fixed home and principal establishment, and to which, whenever he is absent, he has the intention of returning.” Id. (quoting Rodríguez-Díaz v.

Edwards Lifesciences CardiAQ, LLC v. Kenneth Perry

District Court, D. Massachusetts · Mar 31, 2019

The TCT Sketch also does not clearly show reversing anchors. In fact, the anchors in the TCT Sketch do not appear to reverse. CardiAQ Facts ¶¶ 20–21. … See Ethicon, Inc., 135 F.3d at 1460 (“[O]ne does not qualify as a joint inventor by merely assisting the actual inventor after conception of the claimed invention.”). V.

Kravetz v. United States Trust Co.

941 F. Supp. 1295 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Sep 7, 1996

In their reply memorandum in support of their' motion for summary judgment, the defendants claim that “[bjeeause [the plaintiffs’ conduct] establishes that this case is frivolous, that the plaintiffs were never able to support … Smith Barney Shearson, Inc., 76 F.3d 1245 (1st Cir.1996), the trustee and participants in an ERISA qualified pension and profit sharing plan brought an action against its brokers for breach of fiduciary duty and fraud.

Burger v. Berryhill

District Court, D. Massachusetts · Mar 31, 2019

The ALJ also noted that the record did not contain evidence from these providers on or before the date last insured establishing disabling symptoms. … In that regard, the plaintiff contends that the three letters from his treatment providers in 2017 “clearly demonstrate [his] case in 2014, while he was insured” for disability benefits.

Advent Technologies, Inc. v. Kaye

District Court, D. Massachusetts · Apr 29, 2024

Mass. 2008) (“extensive post-contract communications that relate to the operation of the contract itself” may also qualify as transacting business). a. … Advent Inc. has therefore failed to establish personal jurisdiction under subsection (c). 3. Mass. Gen.

Bangura v. Department of Veteran Affairs

District Court, D. Massachusetts · Sep 26, 2018

If, however, she was not constructively discharged at that time, the VA clearly had grounds to terminate her employment after she was absent from work for a year. … To make out a prima facie case of disability discrimination, the Plaintiff must prove by a preponderance of the evidence that: (1) she was disabled within the meaning of the statute; (2) she was qualified to perform the

Ortiz v. O'Malley

District Court, D. Massachusetts · May 14, 2025

Accordingly, in reviewing the ALJ’s non-severity determination, the Court more accurately asks “whether the ALJ had substantial evidence to find that [pursuant to SSR 85-28] the medical evidence clearly established that … May 4, 2011) (agreeing with Webb, 433 F.3d at 687, and stating that “an ALJ may find that a claimant lacks a medically severe impairment only when his conclusion is ‘clearly established by medical evidence’”) (citation

Consumer Financial Protection Bureau v. Commonwealth Equity Group, LLC

District Court, D. Massachusetts · Sep 30, 2024

Romanettes (i) and (ii) provide that before they may accept any payment, telemarketers must first allow the time frame in which they indicated their services would be complete to expire and then provide consumers with qualified … 9 Restitution is legal in nature where it “impos[es] a merely personal liability upon the defendant to pay a sum of money,” but equitable in nature where the plaintiff seeks money or property that can “clearly

Samah

District Court, D. Massachusetts · Jan 8, 2026

While the amended complaint does not use the term “constructive discharge” and instead refers to Samah’s “separation” and “termination,” it clearly seeks to invoke the constructive discharge doctrine. … Those elements are that “(1) the plaintiff must be a member of a protected class; (2) [he] must be qualified for [his] job; (3) [he] must suffer an adverse employment action at the hands of [his] employer; and (4) there

Lotus Development Corp. v. Paperback Software International

740 F. Supp. 37 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Jun 28, 1990

Taking account of all three elements of the legal test, I determine that copyright-ability of the user interface of 1-2-3 is established. VI. … Oman, 888 F.2d at 882 (“Video games, case law confirms, rank as 'audiovisual works’ that may qualify for copyright protection.”); Midway Manufacturing Co. v. Artic International, Inc., 704 F.2d 1009, 1012 (7th Cir.)

Bose Corp. v. JBL, Inc.

98 F. Supp. 2d 80 · District Court, D. Massachusetts · Apr 14, 2000

. § 112 because the term “substantially” rendered the claim indefinite; that is, it did not “enable one skilled in the art to reasonably establish what may be construed as being within the metes and bounds of the term of … First, as to the Glastonbury II port, Bose disputes whether that port qualifies as pri- or art.