This case arises out of a bouncy-house franchise. In my experience, kids liked the Star Trek theme for the party more than they did the bouncy house.
This short order zeroed in on the “many” disputes of material fact that prevented summary judgment in this case.
The court concluded that the defendant did not have a regular and established place of business in the district.
Home Depot sought a transfer to Georgia, where its headquarters is located.
This case deals with whether the plaintiff had sufficient rights when it sued the defendant for patent infringement.
You can’t default tamales. Now there’s a case that says so.
I know – why would anyone not want to be in federal court, right? But if you don’t want to be, here are some old school standards in an old school font.
Calm down, it’s a trademark case in Austin. But I’m serious about the 50(a) part.
Let’s see – this is a claim concerning counterfeit Baylor-branded sporting good products and the question is whether the defendant “purposefully directed” its activities at … Texas. Hmmm.
I think the 1989 Concord Blue Devils said it best – ya gotta try. But this Order Denying Motion For Alternative Service did as well.