§Why CasetextPricing

Bikila v. Vibram USA Inc.

Second MOTION for Summary Judgment

45 Cited authorities

  1. Anderson v. Liberty Lobby, Inc.

    477 U.S. 242 (1986)   Cited 236,238 times   38 Legal Analyses
    Holding that summary judgment is not appropriate if "the dispute about a material fact is ‘genuine,’ that is, if the evidence is such that a reasonable jury could return a verdict for the nonmoving party"

  2. Phillips Petroleum Co. v. Shutts

    472 U.S. 797 (1985)   Cited 1,788 times   19 Legal Analyses
    Holding that “the Due Process Clause of course requires that the named plaintiff at all times adequately represent the interests of the absent class members”

  3. Oregon Waste Sys., Inc. v. Dep. of Envt'l Qual. of Ore

    511 U.S. 93 (1994)   Cited 688 times   7 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a greater surcharge on disposal of in-state waste than on disposal of out-of-state waste facially discriminated against interstate commerce

  4. Healy v. the Beer Institute

    491 U.S. 324 (1989)   Cited 486 times   10 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a state statute violated the Commerce Clause because it had the practical effect of establishing scale of prices for use in other states

  5. Hines v. Davidowitz

    312 U.S. 52 (1941)   Cited 2,184 times   12 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the Alien Registration Act of 1940 preempted Pennsylvania's alien registration requirements

  6. Cohn v. Petsmart, Inc.

    281 F.3d 837 (9th Cir. 2002)   Cited 807 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Holding that a settlement demand was sufficient to satisfy the amount in controversy where plaintiff made no attempt to disavow the letter or offer contrary evidence

  7. AMF Inc. v. Sleekcraft Boats

    599 F.2d 341 (9th Cir. 1979)   Cited 1,046 times   18 Legal Analyses
    Holding "Slickcraft" to be suggestive of a fast boat

  8. Network Automation, Inc. v. Advanced Systems Concepts, Inc.

    638 F.3d 1137 (9th Cir. 2011)   Cited 357 times   11 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the similarity of two marks can be tested on three levels: "sight, sound, and meaning."

  9. Broussard v. University of California

    192 F.3d 1252 (9th Cir. 1999)   Cited 311 times
    Finding report by plaintiff's vocational rehabilitation specialist that "did not compare the jobs [plaintiff] could do before and after the onset of her [disability]," and did not identify the "time periods he was analyzing" to be "the type of conclusory allegation which this court found insufficient to withstand the motion for summary judgment in Thompson"

  10. Cairns v. Franklin Mint Co.

    292 F.3d 1139 (9th Cir. 2002)   Cited 283 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the sale of collectibles bearing the name and likeness of Princess Diana was a nominative fair use

  11. Rule 56 - Summary Judgment

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 56   Cited 328,775 times   158 Legal Analyses
    Holding a party may move for summary judgment on any part of any claim or defense in the lawsuit

  12. Section 1125 - False designations of origin, false descriptions, and dilution forbidden

    15 U.S.C. § 1125   Cited 15,279 times   320 Legal Analyses
    Holding "the person who asserts trade dress protection has the burden of proving that the matter sought to be protected is not functional"

  13. Section 1117 - Recovery for violation of rights

    15 U.S.C. § 1117   Cited 4,886 times   144 Legal Analyses
    Granting district courts significant discretion to award damages for a violation of § 1125

  14. Section 19.86.010 - Definitions

    Wash. Rev. Code § 19.86.010   Cited 331 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Defining "trade" or "commerce" as "the sale of assets or services, and any commerce directly or indirectly affecting the people of the state of Washington"

  15. Section 63.60.010 - Property right-Use of name, voice, signature, photograph, or likeness

    Wash. Rev. Code § 63.60.010   Cited 30 times

    Every individual or personality has a property right in the use of his or her name, voice, signature, photograph, or likeness. Such right exists in the name, voice, signature, photograph, or likeness of individuals or personalities deceased before, on, or after June 11, 1998. This right shall be freely transferable, assignable, and licensable, in whole or in part, by any otherwise permissible form of inter vivos or testamentary transfer, including without limitation a will or other testamentary instrument

  16. Section 63.60.060 - Infringement of right-Superior courts-Injunctions-Liability for damages and profits-Impoundment-Destruction-Attorneys' fees

    Wash. Rev. Code § 63.60.060   Cited 13 times
    Authorizing a cause of action for infringement of personality rights

  17. Section 63.60.030 - Transfer, assignment, and license

    Wash. Rev. Code § 63.60.030   Cited 5 times

    (1) Every individual or personality has a property right in the use of his or her name, voice, signature, photograph, or likeness. Such right shall be freely transferable, assignable, and licensable, in whole or in part, by contract or inter vivos transfer. This right shall not expire upon the death of the individual or personality, but shall be owned and enforceable by the following successors, heirs, or other transferees of living or deceased individuals or personalities: (a) Except where such

  18. Section 63.60.020 - Definitions

    Wash. Rev. Code § 63.60.020   Cited 2 times   1 Legal Analyses

    Unless the context clearly requires otherwise, the definitions in this section apply throughout this chapter. (1) "Deceased individual" means any individual, regardless of the individual's place of domicile, residence, or citizenship at the time of death or otherwise, who has died within ten years before January 1, 1998, or thereafter. (2) "Deceased personality" means any individual, regardless of the personality's place of domicile, residence, or citizenship at the time of death or otherwise, whose

  19. Section 63.60.040 - Right is exclusive for individuals and personalities

    Wash. Rev. Code § 63.60.040   Cited 2 times

    (1) For individuals, except to the extent that the individual may have assigned or licensed such rights, the rights protected in this chapter are exclusive to the individual, subject to the assignment or licensing of such rights, during such individual's lifetime and are exclusive to the persons entitled to such rights under RCW 63.60.030 for a period of ten years after the death of the individual except to the extent that the persons entitled to such rights under RCW 63.60.030 may have assigned