|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|11-982||2d Cir.||Nov 7, 2012||Jan 9, 2012||9-0||Roberts||OT 2012|
Disclosure: Goldstein & Russell, P.C., whose attorneys work for or contribute to this blog in various capacities, serves as counsel to the respondent in this case.
Holding: Nike's unconditional and irrevocable covenant not to enforce a trademark against a competitor’s existing products and any future “colorable imitations” moots the competitor’s action to have the trademark declared invalid.
Judgment: Affirmed, 9-0, in an opinion by Chief Justice Roberts on January 9, 2012. Justice Kennedy filed a concurring opinion, in which Justices Thomas, Alito and Sotomayor joined.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Feb 8 2012||Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due March 12, 2012)|
|Mar 6 2012||Waiver of right of respondent Nike, Inc. to respond filed.|
|Mar 21 2012||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of April 13, 2012.|
|Apr 4 2012||Response Requested . (Due May 4, 2012)|
|Apr 17 2012||Order extending time to file response to petition to and including June 4, 2012.|
|Jun 4 2012||Brief of respondent Nike, Inc. in opposition filed.|
|Jun 5 2012||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of June 21, 2012.|
|Jun 8 2012||Reply of petitioner Already, LLC, dba Yums filed. (Distributed)|
|Jun 25 2012||Petition GRANTED.|
|Jul 23 2012||SET FOR ARGUMENT ON Wednesday, November 7, 2012|
|Jul 24 2012||The time to file the joint appendix and petitioner's brief on the merits is extended to and including August 16, 2012.|
|Aug 3 2012||The time to file respondent's brief on the merits is extended to and including September 24, 2012.|
|Aug 3 2012||Record received from U.S.C.A. for 2nd. This record is electronic.|
|Aug 3 2012||Record from U.S.D.C. for Southern District is electronic.|
|Aug 16 2012||Joint appendix and supplemental joint appendix filed.|
|Aug 16 2012||Brief of petitioner Already, LLC d/b/a YUMS filed.|
|Aug 23 2012||Brief amicus curiae of United States supporting Vacatur and Remand filed.|
|Aug 23 2012||Brief amici curiae of Intellectual Property Professors filed. (Distributed)|
|Aug 23 2012||Brief amicus curiae of Public Patent Foundation filed. (Distributed)|
|Aug 23 2012||Brief amicus curiae of Intellectual Property Owners Association in support of neither party filed. (Distributed)|
|Aug 24 2012||CIRCULATED.|
|Sep 11 2012||Consent to the filing of amicus curiae briefs in support of either party or neither party received from counsel for the respondent.|
|Sep 24 2012||Brief of respondent Nike, Inc. filed. (Distributed)|
|Sep 28 2012||Brief amicus curiae of American Intellectual Property Law Association filed. (Distributed)|
|Oct 1 2012||Brief amicus curiae of International Trademark Association filed. (Distributed)|
|Oct 1 2012||Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument filed.|
|Oct 1 2012||Brief amici curiae of Levi Strauss & Co., et al. filed. (Distributed)|
|Oct 15 2012||Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument GRANTED.|
|Oct 24 2012||Reply of petitioner Already, LLC d/b/a YUMS filed. (Distributed)|
|Nov 7 2012||Argued. Fpr petitioner: James W. Dabney, New York, N. Y. For United States as amicus curiae: Ginger D. Anders, Assistant to the Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C. For respondents: Thomas C. Goldstein, Washington, D. C.|
|Jan 9 2013||Adjudged to be AFFIRMED. Roberts, C. J., delivered the opinion for a unanimous Court. Kennedy, J., filed a concurring opinion, in which Thomas, Alito, and Sotomayor, JJ., joined.|
|Feb 11 2013||JUDGMENT ISSUED.|
FWOTSC. You figure that one out.*
h/t to @marinklevy for the story and the always-entertaining threads.
#SCOTUS announces that it will hold a formal, although "purely ceremonial," investiture ceremony for Justice Amy Coney Barrett next Friday. Attendance at the ceremony is by invitation only, & press coverage will be pooled. Full announcement is here: https://www.supremecourt.gov/publicinfo/press/pressreleases/pr_09-24-21
Need a refresher on "cert before judgment" practice at SCOTUS? We've got you covered.
@steve_vladeck examined the practice (among other types of extraordinary relief) in 2018: https://www.scotusblog.com/2018/12/power-versus-discretion-extraordinary-relief-and-the-supreme-court/
And Kevin Russell wrote a detailed explainer in 2011:
Abortion providers in Texas return to Supreme Court, now asking the justices for immediate review on the merits of their challenge to the state’s six-week abortion ban (cert. before judgment)
The Supreme Court will have a new oral argument procedure when they return to the bench Oct. 4. There will be an opportunity for individual questioning by each justice in order of seniority.
Interesting new procedure for oral arguments when the justices return to in-person arguments next month. Does it increase the chances that we will continue to hear from Justice Thomas, who was an active participant using the taking-turns format? https://twitter.com/GregStohr/status/1440318536723812363
NEW: The Supreme Court just released its December argument calendar. Dobbs v. Jackson Women's Health Organization, the term's big abortion case, will be argued Dec. 1.
#SCOTUS will hear oral argument in Mississippi abortion case challenging Roe v. Wade on Dec. 1. Full December argument calendar is here: https://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_calendars/MonthlyArgumentCalDecember2021.pdf
We noted yesterday that Justice Thomas was speaking at Notre Dame but that there was no livestream. A video of his speech is now posted: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-kb4bFYdujA
Thomas criticized the media and defended the court's independence. Seems to be a theme among the justices lately.
💥 Breyer continues book tour (including @colbertlateshow two nights ago).
💥 Barrett gave a speech Sunday @uofl.
💥 Thomas is slated to give the 2021 Tocqueville Lecture today @NotreDame (but, like Barrett's speech, there is apparently no livestream).