Case law

Saratoga Vichy Spring Co., Inc. v. Lehman

491 F. Supp. 141 · District Court, N.D. New York · Aug 24, 1979

To the students of thoroughbred racing the name Saratoga is established in the sport as “the Graveyard of Favorites”. … Plaintiff’s marks qualified for registration in accordance with this proviso. The Lanham Act eased the restrictions upon the registration of geographically descriptive marks.

Steber Mach. Co. v. Random Knitting Co.

217 F. 796 · District Court, N.D. New York · Nov 12, 1914

As to the object of the invention the patentee says: “The object of my invention is to produce a fabric having superior wearing qualifies, a considerable amount of elasticity, and a ribbed face side, resembling very nearly … Considering the results attained and the utility of the fabric, and its popularity and large sales, all of which are established, I cannot agree with the contention of the defendants, and must and do hold that the patent

Variscite NY Four, LLC v. New York State Cannabis Control Board

District Court, N.D. New York · Feb 2, 2024

An individual from a CDI does not need to be from New York to qualify for priority as a SEE Applicant. Dkt. … No. 1 at ¶¶ 32-33, 52, is sufficient to establish an injury in fact.

Bricklayers & Allied Craft-Workers Local 2 v. C.G. Yantch, Inc.

316 F. Supp. 2d 130 · District Court, N.D. New York · Dec 3, 2003

Yantch did enter into a collective bargaining agreement, plaintiffs breached it by not providing qualified and appropriate plasterers. Id. at ¶¶ 93-94. … To this point, Magistrate Judge Treece has shown admirable restraint and patience in this case, though even he is clearly weary of the attorneys’ conduct.

Mohawk Gaming Enterprises, LLC v. Affiliated FM Insurance Co.

District Court, N.D. New York · Apr 15, 2021

However, as other courts have explained, the inclusion of the modifier “physical” in a phrase such as “direct result of physical damage” clearly imposes a requirement that the damage actually be tangible in nature … Even assuming otherwise, the presence of the novel coronavirus at the Casino would still not qualify as “physical damage.” See Pl.’s Opp’n at 9–12 (arguing same).

DOE v. Patrick

District Court, N.D. New York · Feb 3, 2020

In Johnson, the Second Circuit affirmed the denial of qualified immunity to a gym teacher who allegedly assaulted a student by lifting him off the ground by his neck, dragging him across a gym floor, choking him, slamming … Likewise for Knicrumah, in which the Court rejected qualified immunity for a teacher who “allegedly used excessive force against plaintiff by grabbing him, slamming him against [a brick] wall, and holding him there without

Kadant, Inc. v. Seeley MacHine, Inc.

244 F. Supp. 2d 19 · District Court, N.D. New York · Jan 30, 2003

However, “the term ‘reverse engineering’ is not a talisman that may immunize the theft of trade secrets.” Telerate Systems, Inc. v. Caro, 689 F.Supp. 221, 233 (S.D.N.Y.1988). … See Leo Silfen, 29 N.Y.2d at 391 , 328 N.Y.S.2d 423 , 278 N.E.2d 636 . 12 .Plaintiff clearly has not demonstrated such concrete evidence.

New York State Electric & Gas Corp. v. FirstEnergy Corp.

808 F. Supp. 2d 417 · District Court, N.D. New York · Sep 7, 2011

Booth has established the existence of due care, and thus its ability to qualify for the § 107(b)(3) defense to what would otherwise be strict liability as an owner of the Elmira Site. In sum, I find that I.D. … Applications for reconsideration are also subject to an overarching “clearly erroneous” gauge. Sumner, 103 F.Supp.2d at 558 .

Morales v. NYS Department of Labor

865 F. Supp. 2d 220 · District Court, N.D. New York · Mar 30, 2012

For purposes of the instant motions, neither defendants dispute that plaintiff was qualified to hold the position she had. 1. … Plaintiff does not address whether the one week-suspension was imposed as a pretext, but she does argue that “[t]he event that most clearly demonstrates that DOL’s adverse actions against Ms.

Cameron Group, LLC v. Eilerson Development Corporation

District Court, N.D. New York · Jun 3, 2021

Similarly, the movant is entitled to summary judgment when the nonmoving party has failed “to establish the existence of an element essential to [the movant’s] case, and on which [the movant] will bear the burden of proof … But the umbrella policy is clearly excess, not primary.

Stewart Park and Reserve Coalition Inc. v. Slater

374 F. Supp. 2d 243 · District Court, N.D. New York · Jun 22, 2005

As we have previously noted, When specialists express conflicting views, an agency must have discretion to rely on the reasonable opinions of its qualified experts even if, as an original matter, a court might find contrary … Stewart State Forest, a multipurpose reforestation area, was established with this express purpose. Dkt. No. 102, Ex. 1, Section V.A. 14 .

United States v. Waterbury

District Court, N.D. New York · Sep 22, 2021

For a contempt order to issue, the moving party must establish “[b]y clear and convincing evidence that the alleged contemnor violated the district court’s edict.” King v. … Defendants timely proposed an individual to be the independent property manager; however, the person was not qualified under the terms of the Decree because she was not a professional property manager nor a licensed real

Regeneron Pharmaceuticals Inc. v. Novartis Pharma AG

District Court, N.D. New York · Jan 31, 2022

Whether a patentholder deserves to lose out on its monopolistic immunity is a question to be answered only under Federal Circuit law. See id. … Chapman, 546 F.3d at 238 (noting that plaintiff has burden of establishing relevant product market).

Novartis Pharma AG v. Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc.

District Court, N.D. New York · Jan 31, 2022

Whether a patentholder deserves to lose out on its monopolistic immunity is a question to be answered only under Federal Circuit law. See id. … Chapman, 546 F.3d at 238 (noting that plaintiff has burden of establishing relevant product market).

Ruggles v. WellPoint, Inc.

272 F.R.D. 320 · District Court, N.D. New York · Feb 22, 2011

Additionally, Nichols Raster, PLLP is clearly competent to act as class counsel. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(g)(1). 5. … To establish the predominance of common questions, “a plaintiff must establish that ‘the issues in the class action that are subject to generalized proof, and thus applicable to the class as a whole, ... ■ predominate over

Endurance American Insurance Company v. DiStefano

District Court, N.D. New York · Sep 28, 2023

necessarily the product of a legal error or a clearly erroneous factual finding, cannot be located within the range of permissible decisions.’” … Robins, 578 U.S. 330, 338 (2016) (“The plaintiff, as the party invoking federal jurisdiction, bears the burden of establishing these elements.”); In re Old Carco LLC, 576 F.

Welch v. Bio-Reference Laboratories, Inc.

District Court, N.D. New York · Feb 21, 2025

A state court decision is “contrary to” clearly established C. … Taylor, 529 U.S. 362, 412–13, 120 S.Ct. 1495, and did not involve the unreasonable application of, clearly 146 L.Ed.2d 389 (2000); accord Hoi Man Yung v. Walker, 468 established federal law.

Gosier v. Collins

District Court, N.D. New York · Oct 25, 2024

Adirondack Beverage Co., 141 F.3d 434, 437 (2d Cir. 1998) (“[A]n action is ‘frivolous’ when either: (1) the factual contentions are clearly baseless . . . or (2) the claim is based on an indisputably meritless legal theory … Analysis Plaintiff seeks relief pursuant to Section 1983, which establishes a cause of action for “‘the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured

United States v. Mango

997 F. Supp. 264 · District Court, N.D. New York · Mar 5, 1998

Even a cursory reading of § 404 establishes that this statute clearly authorizes only the Secretary acting through the Chief of Engineers to issue permits for the discharge of dredged or fill material into the navigable waters … This statement, however, is of little value to the government because it is clearly dicta.

Boylan v. Astrue

32 F. Supp. 3d 238 · District Court, N.D. New York · Sep 24, 2012

If a claimant’s impairment “manifests only some of those criteria, no matter how severely,” the impairment does not qualify. Sullivan, 493 U.S. at 530 , 110 S.Ct. 885 . … Ahn’s treatment notes clearly demonstrated that Plaintiffs condition was severe and extremely painful. (T at 183-86).