Harjo et al. v. Pro-Football, Inc.

43 Cited authorities

Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
509 U.S. 579 (1993) Cited 27,070 times 238 Legal Analyses
Holding that a trial judge must ensure that all admitted expert testimony "is not only relevant, but reliable"
United States v. Mitchell
463 U.S. 206 (1983) Cited 2,700 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that "the Tucker Act effects a waiver of sovereign immunity" and observing that "the existence of consent [to be sued] is a prerequisite for jurisdiction"
United States v. Mitchell
445 U.S. 535 (1980) Cited 2,401 times
Holding that the United States does not have a specific fiduciary obligation to manage timber resources on allotted lands, held in trust for Indian-allotees
Morton v. Mancari
417 U.S. 535 (1974) Cited 1,369 times 9 Legal Analyses
Holding that the Indian Commerce Clause empowers Congress to “single Indians out as a proper subject for separate legislation.”
Menominee Tribe v. United States
391 U.S. 404 (1968) Cited 220 times
Finding no clear intent to abrogate treaty
Rosebud Sioux Tribe v. Kneip
430 U.S. 584 (1977) Cited 169 times
Holding that a 1904 act of Congress did not modify a 1901 Indian agreement, despite a suggestive minor change in language
Exton Drive-In v. Home Indemnity Co.
400 U.S. 819 (1970) Cited 132 times
No. 167. October 12, 1970. Sup. Ct. Pa. Certiorari denied. Reported below: 436 Pa. 480, 261 A. 2d 319.
Pyramid Lake Paiute Tr. v. U.S. Dept. of Navy
898 F.2d 1410 (9th Cir. 1990) Cited 182 times
Holding that acting agency's reliance on FWS biological opinion will satisfy obligation under ESA if the challenging party cannot point to "new information" that the FWS did not take into account
Seminole Nation v. U.S.
316 U.S. 286 (1942) Cited 217 times
Holding the United States to the "most exacting fiduciary standards"
Northern Cheyenne Tribe v. Hollowbreast
425 U.S. 649 (1976) Cited 67 times
Recognizing Congress' power to "alter allotment plans until those plans are executed," in the absence of a "clear expression by Congress to the contrary."
Rule 26 - Duty to Disclose; General Provisions Governing Discovery
Fed. R. Civ. P. 26 Cited 99,695 times 680 Legal Analyses
Adopting Fed.R.Civ.P. 37
Rule 37 - Failure to Make Disclosures or to Cooperate in Discovery; Sanctions
Fed. R. Civ. P. 37 Cited 47,839 times 332 Legal Analyses
Holding that a party may be barred from using a witness if it fails to disclose the witness
Rule 45 - Subpoena
Fed. R. Civ. P. 45 Cited 17,508 times 112 Legal Analyses
Holding that a subpoena may command a person to attend a trial, hearing, or deposition "within 100 miles of where the person resides, is employed, or regularly transacts business in person"
Rule 34 - Producing Documents, Electronically Stored Information, and Tangible Things, or Entering onto Land, for Inspection and Other Purposes
Fed. R. Civ. P. 34 Cited 13,643 times 154 Legal Analyses
Finding that the rules related to electronic discovery were "not meant to create a routine right of direct access to a party's electronic information system, although such access may be justified in some circumstances."
Rule 611 - Mode and Order of Examining Witnesses and Presenting Evidence
Fed. R. Evid. 611 Cited 1,937 times 7 Legal Analyses
Granting trial judge broad discretion to control witness examination
Section 1052 - Trademarks registrable on principal register; concurrent registration
15 U.S.C. § 1052 Cited 1,599 times 274 Legal Analyses
Granting authority to refuse registration to a trademark that so resembles a registered mark "as to be likely, when used on or in connection with the goods of the applicant, to cause confusion, or to cause mistake, or to deceive"
Section 1064 - Cancellation of registration
15 U.S.C. § 1064 Cited 917 times 50 Legal Analyses
Allowing a petition to cancel a certification mark if the registered owner "discriminately refuses to certify" qualifying goods or services
Section 2.122 - Matters in evidence
37 C.F.R. § 2.122 Cited 23 times 1 Legal Analyses
Providing that in inter partes proceeding, "[t]he allegation in an application for registration, or in a registration, of a date of use is not evidence on behalf of the applicant or registrant" but, rather, "a date of use of a mark must be established by competent evidence"
Section 2.125 - Filing and service of testimony
37 C.F.R. § 2.125 Cited 1 times
(a) One copy of the declaration or affidavit prepared in accordance with § 2.123 , together with copies of documentary exhibits and duplicates or photographs of physical exhibits, shall be served on each adverse party at the time the declaration or affidavit is submitted to the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board during the assigned testimony period. (b) One copy of the transcript of each testimony deposition taken in accordance with § 2.123 or § 2.124 , together with copies of documentary exhibits

Harjo et al. v. Pro-Football, Inc.

43 Cited authorities

Holding that a trial judge must ensure that all admitted expert testimony "is not only relevant, but reliable"

Holding that "the Tucker Act effects a waiver of sovereign immunity" and observing that "the existence of consent [to be sued] is a prerequisite for jurisdiction"

Holding that the United States does not have a specific fiduciary obligation to manage timber resources on allotted lands, held in trust for Indian-allotees

Holding that the Indian Commerce Clause empowers Congress to “single Indians out as a proper subject for separate legislation.”

Finding no clear intent to abrogate treaty

Holding that a 1904 act of Congress did not modify a 1901 Indian agreement, despite a suggestive minor change in language

Holding that acting agency's reliance on FWS biological opinion will satisfy obligation under ESA if the challenging party cannot point to "new information" that the FWS did not take into account

Holding the United States to the "most exacting fiduciary standards"

Recognizing Congress' power to "alter allotment plans until those plans are executed," in the absence of a "clear expression by Congress to the contrary."

Adopting Fed.R.Civ.P. 37

Holding that a party may be barred from using a witness if it fails to disclose the witness

Holding that a subpoena may command a person to attend a trial, hearing, or deposition "within 100 miles of where the person resides, is employed, or regularly transacts business in person"

Finding that the rules related to electronic discovery were "not meant to create a routine right of direct access to a party's electronic information system, although such access may be justified in some circumstances."

Granting trial judge broad discretion to control witness examination

Granting authority to refuse registration to a trademark that so resembles a registered mark "as to be likely, when used on or in connection with the goods of the applicant, to cause confusion, or to cause mistake, or to deceive"

Allowing a petition to cancel a certification mark if the registered owner "discriminately refuses to certify" qualifying goods or services

Providing that in inter partes proceeding, "[t]he allegation in an application for registration, or in a registration, of a date of use is not evidence on behalf of the applicant or registrant" but, rather, "a date of use of a mark must be established by competent evidence"