Bad Hair Day: JMOL & MNT in Trademark Case

My wife took out a restraining order preventing me from running a picture of her hair in the ’80s for use in this post about the I&I Hair v. Beauty Plus case. My sister, however, wasn’t as quick, so it’s this 1989 shot of us and our hair that introduces this order by Judge Lynn granting part of the defendant’s renewed motion for judgment as a matter of law and cutting the jury award from $2.57 million to $0.07 million.

Breaking: Northern District of Texas Issues Nationwide Injunction Against Judicial Conference “Guidance” Document

Old Red never looked so good. Okay, that’s both an April Fool’s joke and stolen from Josh Blackman’s outstanding Volokh Conspiracy article on the subject this morning. But it’s basically accurate – the NDTX has determined that it won’t change its case assignment practices. In response to Sen. Schumer’s March 21, 2024 letter, NDTX Chief Judge David Godbey wrote that “the district judges of the Northern District of Texas met on March 27, 2024, and discussed case assignment. The consensus was not to make any change to our case assignment process at this time.”

The Lawyers From Monday’s Post Are Okay

On Monday I posted on a case in which Judge Lynn denied the parties’ joint motion to stay this case pending the filing of an application for IPR, noting the case was set for trial in six months. Traumatized readers were anxious to know – what happened next? Well, the case actually settled the very next day, but not for the reason you think – it involves the granting of a motion to compel and something interesting about an award of fees and expenses.

Fees Awarded Against Client (But Not Lawyer) in Patent Case

Only a little lower in the stack, but without any apparent connection to UP President Beth Whited’s visit to Marshall last week, was this order by Chief Judge Godbey of the NDTX finding the case “exceptional” and awarding fees under 35 USC § 285, and assessing fees against the plaintiff, but declining to award sanctions under 28 USC § 1927 or the court’s inherent powers, or hold the plaintiff’s counsel jointly and severally liable for the fees. But I did have a nice visit with Judge Godbey’s wife at my seminar Friday in Austin, so there’s that.

Just A Reminder That If Your Kids’ Birthday Cakes Don’t Look Like This You’re Doing Parenting Wrong. And Motion to Compel Granted on Deficiencies in E-Discovery Production

In a scene reminiscent of any number of Star Trek episodes where the bad guys gain access to sensitive computer data, the plaintiff alleges that the defendant over-accessed plaintiff’s medical imaging systems to generate fake access credentials. The court granted plaintiff’s second motion to compel, requiring defendant to (1) provide “cross-walk” information relating a revised production to the original, (2) fix issues with production of text messages, (3) reproduce documents in the (organizational) form in which they are maintained, and (4) properly mark documents with their confidentiality designations.