§Why CasetextPricing

Invista S.a r.l. et al v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours And Company et al

MEMORANDUM OF LAW in Support re: 21 MOTION to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction.. Document

33 Cited authorities

  1. Hagans v. Lavine

    415 U.S. 528 (1974)   Cited 3,248 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding a federal court may sua sponte dismiss a complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b) when the complaint's allegations “are so attenuated and unsubstantial as to be absolutely devoid of merit, wholly insubstantial, obviously frivolous, plainly insubstantial, or no longer open to discussion”

  2. Makarova v. U.S.

    201 F.3d 110 (2d Cir. 2000)   Cited 3,948 times
    Holding that legal issues presented by Rule 12(b) motion are reviewed de novo

  3. Dastar Corp. v. Twentieth Century Fox Film Corp.

    539 U.S. 23 (2003)   Cited 735 times   20 Legal Analyses
    Holding that federal trademark law helps assure the mark holder that it "will reap the financial, reputation-related rewards associated with a desirable product" rather than an imitator (quoting Qualitex Co. v. Jacobson Prods. Co. , 514 U.S. 159, 163–164, 115 S.Ct. 1300, 131 L.Ed.2d 248 (1995) )

  4. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. Arabian American Oil Co.

    499 U.S. 244 (1991)   Cited 620 times   10 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the presumption against extraterritorial application of federal statutes prevented an employee fired from work being done in Saudi Arabia from sustaining an anti-discrimination action brought under Title VII

  5. Oneida Indian Nation v. County of Oneida

    414 U.S. 661 (1974)   Cited 1,008 times
    Holding that tribe prohibited from giving land to state without federal government's approval

  6. BP Chemicals Ltd. v. Formosa Chemical & Fibre Corp.

    229 F.3d 254 (3d Cir. 2000)   Cited 270 times
    Holding that the "fact that [the contracts at issue between a Taiwanese and New Jersey company] were for a one-time purchase of equipment that was to be shipped to Taiwan and were solicited and negotiated through the Taiwanese agents of the U.S. vendors . . . negate[d] any inference of 'purposeful availment"

  7. ITC Ltd. v. Punchgini, Inc.

    482 F.3d 135 (2d Cir. 2007)   Cited 224 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "trademark rights are acquired and maintained through use of a particular mark. . . . This is true even of marks that have been registered with the Patent and Trademark Office"

  8. Mattel, Inc. v. MCA Records, Inc.

    296 F.3d 894 (9th Cir. 2002)   Cited 222 times   17 Legal Analyses
    Holding that "Barbie Girl" diluted Mattel's "Barbie" mark

  9. Gordon & Breach Science Publishers S.A. v. American Institute of Physics

    859 F. Supp. 1521 (S.D.N.Y. 1994)   Cited 226 times   5 Legal Analyses
    Finding that scientific journal's publication of scientific-journal rankings by cost of journal per thousand characters and times cited is noncommercial speech

  10. Grupo Gigante SA De CV v. Dallo & Co.

    391 F.3d 1088 (9th Cir. 2004)   Cited 122 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Holding that in trademark content, "first in time equals first in right."

  11. Rule 12 - Defenses and Objections: When and How Presented; Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings; Consolidating Motions; Waiving Defenses; Pretrial Hearing

    Fed. R. Civ. P. 12   Cited 345,885 times   922 Legal Analyses
    Granting the court discretion to exclude matters outside the pleadings presented to the court in defense of a motion to dismiss

  12. Section 1331 - Federal question

    28 U.S.C. § 1331   Cited 97,409 times   134 Legal Analyses
    Finding that in order to invoke federal question jurisdiction, a plaintiff's claims must arise "under the Constitution, laws, or treaties of the United States."

  13. Section 1367 - Supplemental jurisdiction

    28 U.S.C. § 1367   Cited 61,771 times   78 Legal Analyses
    Holding that in civil actions proceeding in federal court based solely on diversity jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332, the district court "shall not have supplemental jurisdiction" over "claims by plaintiffs against persons made parties under Rule . . . 24" or "over claims by persons . . seeking to intervene as plaintiffs under Rule 24," if "exercising supplemental jurisdiction over such claims would be inconsistent with the jurisdictional requirements of section 1332"

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

    15 U.S.C. § 1125   Cited 15,276 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"

  15. Section 1121 - Jurisdiction of Federal courts; State and local requirements that registered trademarks be altered or displayed differently; prohibition

    15 U.S.C. § 1121   Cited 1,409 times   4 Legal Analyses
    Granting federal courts original and appellate jurisdiction over claims arising under the Lanham Act

  16. Section 1127 - Modification of plan

    11 U.S.C. § 1127   Cited 707 times   6 Legal Analyses
    Allowing post-confirmation modification of plans upon confirmation by "the court," meaning the bankruptcy court

  17. Section 1126 - International conventions

    15 U.S.C. § 1126   Cited 184 times   29 Legal Analyses
    Stating that an application under § 44 "must state the applicant's bona fide intention to use the mark in commerce, but use in commerce shall not be required prior to registration"