19 Cited authorities

Arbaugh v. Y H Corp.
546 U.S. 500 (2006) Cited 7,932 times 27 Legal Analyses
Holding that Title VII's numerosity requirement is nonjurisdictional even though it serves the important policy goal of “spar[ing] very small businesses from Title VII liability”
Herman Family Revocable Trust v. Teddy Bear
254 F.3d 802 (9th Cir. 2001) Cited 487 times
Holding that "supplemental jurisdiction cannot exist without original jurisdiction."
American Home Assur. v. Glenn Estess Assoc
763 F.2d 1237 (11th Cir. 1985) Cited 437 times
Holding that the district court was well within its discretion in denying Rule 59(e) motion that raised an issue for the first time after entry of summary judgment
Scott v. Pasadena Unified School Dist
306 F.3d 646 (9th Cir. 2002) Cited 225 times
Holding that, where students challenged schools' admissions policies but during the course of litigation became ineligible to apply to those schools, the students' claims were moot
Airframe Sys. v. Raytheon
601 F.3d 9 (1st Cir. 2010) Cited 134 times
Holding that a software development company whose original action had alleged infringement of its copyright through defendants' possession of its source code was barred from bringing a later action that alleged copyright infringement based on the use of its source code
Highway Equipment Co. v. FECO, Ltd.
469 F.3d 1027 (Fed. Cir. 2006) Cited 141 times 2 Legal Analyses
Holding that dismissal with prejudice under Rule 41 based on a covenant not to sue may establish defendant's prevailing party status under § 285
Litecubes v. Northern
523 F.3d 1353 (Fed. Cir. 2008) Cited 122 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that an infringing sale may occur in more than one location as a sale has both a physical and a conceptual dimension to it
Timberlane Lumber Co. v. Bank of America
549 F.2d 597 (9th Cir. 1977) Cited 204 times 7 Legal Analyses
Holding judicial proceedings in another country initiated by a private party were not the sort of sovereign acts that would require deference under the act of state doctrine
Subafilms, Ltd. v. MGM-Pathe Communications Co.
24 F.3d 1088 (9th Cir. 1994) Cited 124 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding that allegations within the U.S. for alleged activities entirely abroad cannot state a claim for copyright infringement under the Copyright Act
Ocean Garden, Inc. v. Marktrade Co., Inc.
953 F.2d 500 (9th Cir. 1991) Cited 91 times 1 Legal Analyses
Holding six-month delay from the filing of the complaint to the motion for preliminary injunction did not bar relief where non-movant was "unable to demonstrate that any harm resulted from the delay because much of the delay during this period was due to extensions requested by [nonmovant and] these extensions were granted to allow for settlement negotiations"
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 348,810 times 931 Legal Analyses
Granting the court discretion to exclude matters outside the pleadings presented to the court in defense of a motion to dismiss
Rule 59 - New Trial; Altering or Amending a Judgment
Fed. R. Civ. P. 59 Cited 43,731 times 67 Legal Analyses
Allowing a party to move to alter or amend a judgment "no later than 28 days after the entry of the judgment"
Section 106 - Exclusive rights in copyrighted works
17 U.S.C. § 106 Cited 3,774 times 108 Legal Analyses
Granting the owners of copyrights in “literary, musical, dramatic, and choreographic works, pantomimes, and pictorial, graphic, or sculptural works” the exclusive right “to display the copyrighted work publicly”

Stevo Design, Inc. v. SBR Marketing Ltd.

19 Cited authorities

Holding that Title VII's numerosity requirement is nonjurisdictional even though it serves the important policy goal of “spar[ing] very small businesses from Title VII liability”

Holding that "supplemental jurisdiction cannot exist without original jurisdiction."

Holding that the district court was well within its discretion in denying Rule 59(e) motion that raised an issue for the first time after entry of summary judgment

Holding that, where students challenged schools' admissions policies but during the course of litigation became ineligible to apply to those schools, the students' claims were moot

Holding that a software development company whose original action had alleged infringement of its copyright through defendants' possession of its source code was barred from bringing a later action that alleged copyright infringement based on the use of its source code

Holding that dismissal with prejudice under Rule 41 based on a covenant not to sue may establish defendant's prevailing party status under § 285

Holding that an infringing sale may occur in more than one location as a sale has both a physical and a conceptual dimension to it

Holding judicial proceedings in another country initiated by a private party were not the sort of sovereign acts that would require deference under the act of state doctrine

Holding that allegations within the U.S. for alleged activities entirely abroad cannot state a claim for copyright infringement under the Copyright Act

Granting the court discretion to exclude matters outside the pleadings presented to the court in defense of a motion to dismiss

Allowing a party to move to alter or amend a judgment "no later than 28 days after the entry of the judgment"

Granting the owners of copyrights in “literary, musical, dramatic, and choreographic works, pantomimes, and pictorial, graphic, or sculptural works” the exclusive right “to display the copyrighted work publicly”