|Docket No.||Op. Below||Argument||Opinion||Vote||Author||Term|
|15-866||6th Cir.||Oct 31, 2016||Mar 22, 2017||6-2||Thomas||OT 2016|
Holding: A feature incorporated into the design of a useful article is eligible for copyright protection under the Copyright Act of 1976 only if the feature (1) can be perceived as a two- or three-dimensional work of art separate from the useful article, and (2) would qualify as a protectable pictorial, graphic or sculptural work -- either on its own or fixed in some other tangible medium of expression -- if it were imagined separately from the useful article into which it is incorporated; that test is satisfied here.
Judgment: Affirmed, 6-2, in an opinion by Justice Thomas on March 22, 2017. Justice Ginsburg filed an opinion concurring in the judgment. Justice Breyer filed a dissenting opinion, in which Justice Kennedy joined.
|Date||Proceedings and Orders |
|Jan 5 2016||Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due February 8, 2016)|
|Jan 21 2016||Order extending time to file response to petition to and including March 4, 2016.|
|Feb 5 2016||Brief amici curiae of Public Knowledge, et al. filed.|
|Feb 8 2016||Brief amici curiae of FormLabs Inc., et al. filed.|
|Mar 4 2016||Brief of respondents Varsity Brands, Inc., et al. in opposition filed.|
|Mar 23 2016||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of April 15, 2016.|
|Mar 23 2016||Reply of petitioner Star Athletica, L.L.C. filed. (Distributed)|
|Apr 18 2016||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of April 22, 2016.|
|Apr 25 2016||DISTRIBUTED for Conference of April 29, 2016.|
|May 2 2016||Petition GRANTED limited to Question 1 presented by the petition.|
|May 10 2016||Consent to the filing of amicus curiae briefs, in support of either party or of neither party, received from counsel for the petitioner.|
|May 17 2016||Consent to the filing of amicus curiae briefs, in support of either party or of neither party, received from counsel for respondents.|
|May 26 2016||The time to file the joint appendix and petitioner's brief on the merits is extended to and including July 15, 2016.|
|May 26 2016||The time to file respondents' brief on the merits is extended to and including September 14, 2016.|
|May 26 2016||Brief amicus curiae of Royal Manticoran Navy: The Official Honor Harrington Fan Association, Inc. filed.|
|Jul 15 2016||Joint appendix filed. (Statement of costs filed)|
|Jul 15 2016||Brief of petitioner Star Athletica, L.L.C. filed.|
|Jul 21 2016||Brief amici curiae of Public Knowledge, et al. filed.|
|Jul 22 2016||Brief amici curiae of Professors Christopher Buccafusco and Jeanne Fromer filed.|
|Jul 22 2016||Brief amici curiae of Intellectual Property Professors filed.|
|Jul 22 2016||Brief amicus curiae of American Intellectual Property Law Association in support of neither party filed.|
|Jul 22 2016||Brief amicus curiae of New York Intellectual Property Law Association in support of neither party filed.|
|Jul 22 2016||Brief amicus curiae of Intellectual Property Law Association of Chicago in support of neither party filed.|
|Sep 2 2016||SET FOR ARGUMENT On Monday, October 31, 2016|
|Sep 9 2016||Record has been requested from the U.S.C.A. 6th Circuit.|
|Sep 14 2016||Brief of respondents Varsity Brands, Inc., et al. filed.|
|Sep 15 2016||Record received from the U.S.D.C. Eastern District of Michigan ( 2 Boxes ).|
|Sep 19 2016||Brief amicus curiae of Intellectual Property Owners Association filed.|
|Sep 21 2016||Brief amicus curiae of United States filed.|
|Sep 21 2016||Motion of the Acting Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument filed.|
|Sep 21 2016||Brief amici curiae of Professors Jeannie Suk Gersen and C. Scott Hemphill filed.|
|Sep 21 2016||Brief amici curiae of Fashion Law Institute, et al. filed.|
|Sep 21 2016||Brief amicus curiae of Chosun International, Inc. filed.|
|Sep 21 2016||Brief amicus curiae of Council of Fashion Designers of America, Inc. filed.|
|Sep 28 2016||CIRCULATED|
|Oct 11 2016||Motion of the Acting Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument GRANTED.|
|Oct 14 2016||Reply of petitioner Star Athletica, L.L.C. filed. (Distributed)|
|Oct 31 2016||Argued. For petitioner: John J. Bursch, Caledonia, Mich. For respondents: William M. Jay, Washington, D. C.; and Eric J. Feigin, Assistant to the Solicitor General, Department of Justice, Washington, D. C. (for United States, as amicus curiae.)|
|Mar 22 2017||Adjudged to be AFFIRMED. Thomas, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Roberts, C. J., and Alito, Sotomayor, and Kagan, JJ., joined. Ginsburg, J., filed an opinion concurring in the judgment. Breyer, J., filed a dissenting opinion in which Kennedy, J., joined.|
|Apr 24 2017||JUDGMENT ISSUED.|
Wait wut.. RBG ghost-wrote the equal protection bits of Obergefell?!
And I learned this on @SCOTUSblog’s TikTok?! https://www.tiktok.com/@scotusblog/video/6922179577724931333
"This is not our first commission rodeo” says Levy. 😉
Love this write up of the @BrookingsInst's panel yesterday with @Susan_Hennessey, @danepps,@cdkang76, and @mollyereynolds.
Thanks, @SCOTUSblog and Kalvis Golde!
Spilling SCOTUS tea on TikTok today. Well, actually, @eskridgebill spilled the tea, we just tok’d about it. 🍵
The Supreme Court got rid of several cases this morning -- in one fell swoop. Read @AHoweBlogger's latest coverage of the emoluments cases, spiritual advisers at Texas executions, Texas abortion policies, COVID restrictions, and NY political corruption.
Justices vacate rulings on Trump and emoluments - SCOTUSblog
The Supreme Court on Monday morning released orders from the justices’ private conference on Friday, Jan. 22. The justices once again did not ac...
In this morning's orders list, SCOTUS took no action on pending cert petitions involving:
- Mississippi's near-ban on abortions after 15 weeks,
- a Trump rule banning Title X clinics from providing abortion referrals,
- the Trump administration's "public charge" immigration rule.
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. This category only includes cookies that ensures basic functionalities and security features of the website. These cookies do not store any personal information.
Any cookies that may not be particularly necessary for the website to function and is used specifically to collect user personal data via analytics, ads, other embedded contents are termed as non-necessary cookies. It is mandatory to procure user consent prior to running these cookies on your website.