James J. Maksimuk (by correction from CWF Flooring, Inc.) v. Connor Sport Court International, LLC

8 Cited authorities

Migra v. Warren City School District Board of Education
465 U.S. 75 (1984) Cited 3,621 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding "that petitioner's state-court judgment in litigation [had] the same claim preclusive effect in federal court that the judgment would have in the . . . state courts"
Tal v. Hogan
453 F.3d 1244 (10th Cir. 2006) Cited 1,451 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that "because the extensiveness of the threat is a question of fact" the court would "assume for the purposes of this opinion that the predicate acts alleged ... establish a pattern of racketeering activity"
Lawlor v. Nat'l Screen Serv.
349 U.S. 322 (1955) Cited 891 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that two suits were not "based on the same cause of action," because "[t]he conduct presently complained of was all subsequent to" the prior judgment and it "cannot be given the effect of extinguishing claims which did not even then exist and which could not possibly have been sued upon in the previous case"
Nasalok Coat v. Nylok
522 F.3d 1320 (Fed. Cir. 2008) Cited 42 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that petition for cancelation of trademark that had been awarded through default judgment was precluded because the petition's effect was to collaterally attack a judgment in an infringement action
Kreager v. General Electric Company
497 F.2d 468 (2d Cir. 1974) Cited 66 times
Finding sole shareholder and officer who controlled action involving corporation "had an identity of interest with [the company] and was bound by judgment against it"
Chromalloy American Corp. v. Kenneth Gordon
736 F.2d 694 (Fed. Cir. 1984) Cited 10 times
Holding that infringement litigation between different marks did not claim preclude later petition in opposition to registration
Rule 15 - Amended and Supplemental Pleadings
Fed. R. Civ. P. 15 Cited 95,797 times 92 Legal Analyses
Finding that, per N.Y. C.P.L.R. § 1024, New York law provides a more forgiving principle for relation back in the context of naming John Doe defendants described with particularity in the complaint
Rule 6 - Computing and Extending Time; Time for Motion Papers
Fed. R. Civ. P. 6 Cited 52,413 times 24 Legal Analyses
Holding that "if the last day [of a period] is a Saturday, Sunday, or legal holiday, the period continues to run until the end of the next day that is not a Saturday, Sunday, or legal holiday."

James J. Maksimuk (by correction from CWF Flooring, Inc.) v. Connor Sport Court International, LLC

8 Cited authorities

Holding "that petitioner's state-court judgment in litigation [had] the same claim preclusive effect in federal court that the judgment would have in the . . . state courts"

Holding that "because the extensiveness of the threat is a question of fact" the court would "assume for the purposes of this opinion that the predicate acts alleged ... establish a pattern of racketeering activity"

Holding that petition for cancelation of trademark that had been awarded through default judgment was precluded because the petition's effect was to collaterally attack a judgment in an infringement action

Finding sole shareholder and officer who controlled action involving corporation "had an identity of interest with [the company] and was bound by judgment against it"

Holding that infringement litigation between different marks did not claim preclude later petition in opposition to registration

Finding that, per N.Y. C.P.L.R. § 1024, New York law provides a more forgiving principle for relation back in the context of naming John Doe defendants described with particularity in the complaint

Holding that "if the last day [of a period] is a Saturday, Sunday, or legal holiday, the period continues to run until the end of the next day that is not a Saturday, Sunday, or legal holiday."