2019 United States Supreme Court case
Iancu v. Brunetti Full case name Andrei Iancu, Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Director, Patent and Trademark Office v. Erik Brunetti Docket no. 18-302 Citations 588 U.S. (more ) Argument Oral argument Prior In re Brunetti , 877 F.3d 1330 (Fed. Cir. 2017); cert . granted, 139 S. Ct. 782 (2019).The Lanham Act prohibition on the registration of "immoral" or "scandalous" trademarks infringes the First Amendment.
Chief Justice
John Roberts
Associate Justices
Clarence Thomas · Ruth Bader Ginsburg Stephen Breyer · Samuel Alito Sonia Sotomayor · Elena Kagan Neil Gorsuch · Brett Kavanaugh
Majority Kagan, joined by Thomas, Ginsburg, Alito, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh Concurrence Alito Concur/dissent Roberts Concur/dissent Breyer Concur/dissent Sotomayor, joined by Breyer
Iancu v. Brunetti , No. 18–302, 588 U.S. ___ (2019), is a Supreme Court of the United States case related to the registration of trademarks under the Lanham Act .[1] [2] It decided 6–3 that the provisions of the Lanham Act prohibiting registration of trademarks of "immoral" or "scandalous" matter is unconstitutional by permitting the United States Patent & Trademark Office to engage in viewpoint discrimination , which violates the Free Speech Clause of the First Amendment .[3]
Legal background
Section 2(a) of the Lanham Act , passed in 1946, holds that a trademark may be refused registration by the United States Patent and Trademark Office if the subject consists of "immoral, deceptive, or scandalous matter." Section 2(a) had also held that trademarks may be refused if they were deemed "disparaging" to individuals or groups, but the Supreme Court unanimously ruled in Matal v. Tam (2017) that the restriction on "disparaging" trademarks was unconstitutional under the First Amendment.[4]
Case background
Erik Brunetti started a clothing line with the skateboarder Natas Kaupas in 1990 and used the name Fuct (stylized as "FUCT"). Fuct stood as an initialism for "Friends U Can't Trust," but Brunetti felt its phonetic closeness to the expletive "fucked " was humorous.[5] Around 2010, Brunetti saw a number of knockoffs of his clothing line being sold on eBay and other Internet sites that inappropriately used the "Fuct" label.[6] In 2011, Brunetti sought to register the trademark on Fuct to stop the knockoffs but was denied registration by the Office Examiner. It stated the word was phonetically similar to the expletive "fucked," which was well-established as a "scandalous" word under Section 2(a) of the Lanham Act. The decision was upheld by the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB) in 2014.[7]
Brunetti then appealed the decision to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit with support of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU). The ACLU argued that the Supreme Court had already ruled there was a higher level of scrutiny when the mere display of a potentially offensive word can be regulated from the 1971 case Cohen v. California .[5] In 2017, the Federal Circuit agreed with the TTAB that "Fuct" would fall under the definition of a "scandalous" word for not only its similarity to the vulgar word but also the use of such words in the target youthful market for the clothing line. However, the Federal Circuit also ruled that the restriction against "scandalous" words of Section 2(a) of the Lanham Act was unconstitutional as it violated Brunetti's rights to free speech, particularly in light of the government failing to take any steps to regulate such speech across the Internet, and it reversed the TTAB's holdings. The Federal Circuit referred to its prior decision and its Supreme Court affirmation in Matal v. Tam related to "disparaging" trademarks in that outside of the area of trademarks, such language remains unrestricted as private speech but not government speech.[8] [5]
Supreme Court
The Patent and Trademark Office, under its director Andrei Iancu , filed for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court, which agreed to hear the case,[9] with oral arguments heard on April 15, 2019.[10] [11] Observers believed that the majority of the Justices would favor Brunetti's case and strike out trademark restrictions on "immoral" or "scandalous" material in part because past inconsistency in the Office's application of the law by having past approved trademarks on "FCUK" and "FUBAR".[6]
The Justices raised the question of whether the implied word from "Fuct" would be considered scandalous to the clothing line's target audience of young adults, but also brought concerns that then the word would appear in advertising, which people outside of this demographic may consider inappropriate speech.[6] The Court expressed caution that others may follow suit with trademarking near matches to other well-established vulgar words and that it should be up to Congress to define a more exacting line, which otherwise does not violate the First Amendment.[11]
The Court issued its decision on June 24, 2019 that affirmed the decision of the Federal Circuit Court.[3] The majority opinion was written by Justice Elena Kagan , joined by Justices Thomas, Ginsburg, Alito, Gorsuch, and Kavanaugh. Kagan wrote that as the Court had found in Matal v. Tam , the Office would need to engage in and has engaged in "viewpoint discrimination" to determine if trademark requests were on the vague definitions of "immoral" or "scandalous". With the Office as a government entity, that would be a violation of First Amendment rights and it was thus decided that the portion of the Lanham Act was unconstitutional.
Justice Samuel Alito wrote a concurring opinion, pointing out that the Court had to make this decision because of the vagueness of the "immoral" and "scandalous" terms in the law, but Congress is empowered to create law that would make a more narrow determination that removed the viewpoint discrimination concern for the Office.[12]
Separate opinions, each dissenting in part with the majority, were written by Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Stephen Breyer and Sonia Sotomayor . The three generally felt that interpreting the "immoral" aspect of the Lanham Act was difficult and thus agreed with the majority in striking that portion of the law.[13] However all three felt the "scandalous" interpretation was not as vague as majority opinion suggested and that the Office would not be engaging in viewpoint discrimination through that action. The three, along with Alito in his concurring opinion, expressed concern that this decision will lead to a flood of new trademarks that would be considered crude and the creation of public spaces that would be repugnant to some people.[12] [14]
References
^ "Search - Supreme Court of the United States" . Supremecourt.gov. Retrieved October 11, 2019 .
^ "Iancu v. Brunetti | OSG | Department of Justice" . Justice.gov. February 15, 2019. Retrieved October 11, 2019 .
^ a b Iancu v. Brunetti , No. 18-302 , 588 U.S. ___ (2019)
^ Liptak, Adam (June 19, 2017). "Justices Strike Down Law Banning Disparaging Trademarks" . The New York Times . Archived from the original on April 10, 2024. Retrieved June 30, 2019 .
^ a b c Chung, Andrew (April 12, 2019). "F-words and T-shirts: U.S. Supreme Court weighs foul language trademarks" . Reuters. Retrieved April 12, 2019 .
^ a b c Totenberg, Nina (April 16, 2019). "Supreme Court Dances Around The F-Word With Real Potential Financial Consequences" . NPR . Retrieved April 16, 2019 .
^ "Trademark documents" (PDF) . ttabvue.uspto.gov . August 1, 2014. Retrieved October 11, 2019 .
^ "Court opinion" (PDF) . www.cafc.uscourts.gov . December 15, 2017. Retrieved October 11, 2019 .
^ "Iancu v. Brunetti: SCOTUS To Hear "Scandalous Marks" Case" . Natlawreview.com. Retrieved October 11, 2019 .
^ "Argument preview: Justices to consider constitutionality of banning trademark registration for immoral and scandalous marks" . SCOTUSblog. April 8, 2019. Retrieved October 11, 2019 .
^ a b Wolf, Richard (April 15, 2019). "F-word: Supreme Court struggles with law blocking trademark protection in cases of vulgarity" . USA Today . Retrieved April 15, 2019 .
^ a b Collins, Terry (June 24, 2019). "FUCT Clothing Can Now Get Trademark Protection, Supreme Court Rules" . Fortune . Retrieved June 24, 2019 .
^ Chung, Andrew (June 24, 2019). "Supreme Court allows foul language trademarks in F-word case" . Reuters. Retrieved June 25, 2019 .
^ de Vogue, Adrian; Sullivan, Kate (June 24, 2019). "Supreme Court says law banning registration of 'scandalous' trademarks violates First Amendment" . CNN . Retrieved June 24, 2019 .
External links
Dormant Commerce Clause
Brown v. Maryland (1827)
Willson v. Black-Bird Creek Marsh Co. (1829)
Cooley v. Board of Wardens (1852)
Wabash, St. Louis & Pacific Railway Co. v. Illinois (1886)
Swift & Co. v. United States (1905)
George W. Bush & Sons Co. v. Malloy (1925)
Baldwin v. G.A.F. Seelig, Inc. (1935)
Edwards v. California (1941)
Southern Pacific Co. v. Arizona (1945)
Dean Milk Co. v. City of Madison (1951)
Miller Bros. Co. v. Maryland (1954)
Bibb v. Navajo Freight Lines, Inc. (1959)
National Bellas Hess v. Illinois (1967)
Pike v. Bruce Church, Inc. (1970)
Hughes v. Alexandria Scrap Corp. (1976)
Complete Auto Transit, Inc. v. Brady (1977)
Hunt v. Washington State Apple Advertising Commission (1977)
City of Philadelphia v. New Jersey (1978)
Exxon Corp. v. Governor of Maryland (1978)
Reeves, Inc. v. Stake (1980)
Kassel v. Consolidated Freightways Corp. (1981)
Sporhase v. Nebraska ex rel. Douglas (1982)
White v. Mass. Council of Construction Employers (1983)
South-Central Timber Development, Inc. v. Wunnicke (1984)
Maine v. Taylor (1986)
Healy v. Beer Institute, Inc. (1989)
Quill Corp. v. North Dakota (1992)
Chemical Waste Management, Inc. v. Hunt (1992)
Oregon Waste Systems, Inc. v. Department of Environmental Quality of Oregon (1994)
C&A Carbone, Inc. v. Town of Clarkstown (1994)
West Lynn Creamery, Inc. v. Healy (1994)
Granholm v. Heald (2005)
United Haulers Ass'n v. Oneida-Herkimer Solid Waste Management Authority (2007)
Department of Revenue of Kentucky v. Davis (2008)
Comptroller of the Treasury of Maryland v. Wynne (2015)
South Dakota v. Wayfair, Inc. (2018)
Tennessee Wine and Spirits Retailers Assn. v. Thomas (2019)
National Pork Producers Council v. Ross (2023)
Others
Copyright Act of 1790 Patent Act of 1793 Patent infringement case lawPatentability case lawCopyright Act of 1831 Copyright Act of 1870 Sherman Antitrust Act of 1890 International Copyright Act of 1891 Copyright Act of 1909 Patent misuse case lawClayton Antitrust Act of 1914 Lanham Act
Inwood Laboratories, Inc. v. Ives Laboratories, Inc. (1982)
San Francisco Arts & Athletics, Inc. v. United States Olympic Committee (1987)
Two Pesos, Inc. v. Taco Cabana, Inc. (1992)
Qualitex Co. v. Jacobson Products Co. (1995)
College Savings Bank v. Florida Prepaid Postsecondary Education Expense Board (1999)
Cooper Industries, Inc. v. Leatherman Tool Group, Inc. (2001)
TrafFix Devices, Inc. v. Marketing Displays, Inc. (2001)
Dastar Corp. v. Twentieth Century Fox Film Corp. (2003)
Moseley v. V Secret Catalogue, Inc. (2003)
Lexmark International, Inc. v. Static Control Components, Inc. (2014)
POM Wonderful LLC v. Coca-Cola Co. (2014)
Matal v. Tam (2017)
Iancu v. Brunetti (2019)
Romag Fasteners, Inc. v. Fossil, Inc. (2020)
Copyright Act of 1976
Zacchini v. Scripps-Howard Broadcasting Co. (1977)
Sony Corp. of America v. Universal City Studios, Inc. (1984)
Mills Music, Inc. v. Snyder (1985)
Harper & Row v. Nation Enterprises (1985)
Community for Creative Non-Violence v. Reid (1989)
Stewart v. Abend (1990)
Feist Publications, Inc., v. Rural Telephone Service Co. (1991)
Fogerty v. Fantasy, Inc. (1994)
Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music, Inc. (1994)
Lotus Dev. Corp. v. Borland Int'l, Inc. (1996)
Quality King Distributors Inc., v. L'anza Research International Inc. (1998)
Feltner v. Columbia Pictures Television, Inc. (1998)
New York Times Co. v. Tasini (2001)
Eldred v. Ashcroft (2003)
MGM Studios, Inc. v. Grokster, Ltd. (2005)
Reed Elsevier, Inc. v. Muchnick (2010)
Golan v. Holder (2012)
Kirtsaeng v. John Wiley & Sons, Inc. (2013)
Petrella v. Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer, Inc. (2014)
American Broadcasting Cos., Inc. v. Aereo, Inc. (2014)
Star Athletica, LLC v. Varsity Brands, Inc. (2017)
Fourth Estate Public Benefit Corp. v. Wall-Street.com (2019)
Rimini Street Inc. v. Oracle USA Inc. (2019)
Allen v. Cooper (2020)
Georgia v. Public.Resource.Org, Inc. (2020)
Other copyright cases Other patent cases
Continental Paper Bag Co. v. Eastern Paper Bag Co. (1908)
Minerals Separation, Ltd. v. Hyde (1916)
United States v. General Electric Co. (1926)
United States v. Univis Lens Co. (1942)
Altvater v. Freeman (1943)
Sinclair & Carroll Co. v. Interchemical Corp. (1945)
Funk Bros. Seed Co. v. Kalo Inoculant Co. (1948)
Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co. v. Supermarket Equipment Corp. (1950)
Graver Tank & Manufacturing Co. v. Linde Air Products Co. (1950)
Aro Manufacturing Co. v. Convertible Top Replacement Co. (1961)
Compco Corp. v. Day-Brite Lighting, Inc. (1964)
Wilbur-Ellis Co. v. Kuther (1964)
Brulotte v. Thys Co. (1964)
Walker Process Equipment, Inc. v. Food Machinery & Chemical Corp. (1965)
Graham v. John Deere Co. (1966)
United States v. Adams (1966)
Brenner v. Manson (1966)
Lear, Inc. v. Adkins (1969)
Anderson's-Black Rock, Inc. v. Pavement Salvage Co. (1969)
Zenith Radio Corp. v. Hazeltine Research, Inc. (1971)
Gottschalk v. Benson (1972)
United States v. Glaxo Group Ltd. (1973)
Dann v. Johnston (1976)
Sakraida v. Ag Pro Inc. (1976)
Parker v. Flook (1978)
Diamond v. Chakrabarty (1980)
Diamond v. Diehr (1981)
Bonito Boats, Inc. v. Thunder Craft Boats, Inc. (1989)
Eli Lilly & Co. v. Medtronic, Inc. (1990)
Markman v. Westview Instruments, Inc. (1996)
Warner-Jenkinson Co. v. Hilton Davis Chemical Co. (1997)
Pfaff v. Wells Electronics, Inc. (1998)
Dickinson v. Zurko (1999)
Florida Prepaid Postsecondary Education Expense Board v. College Savings Bank (1999)
J. E. M. Ag Supply, Inc. v. Pioneer Hi-Bred International, Inc. (2001)
Festo Corp. v. Shoketsu Kinzoku Kogyo Kabushiki Co. (2002)
Merck KGaA v. Integra Lifesciences I, Ltd. (2005)
eBay Inc. v. MercExchange, L.L.C. (2006)
Illinois Tool Works Inc. v. Independent Ink, Inc. (2006)
LabCorp v. Metabolite, Inc. (2006)
MedImmune, Inc. v. Genentech, Inc. (2007)
KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc. (2007)
Microsoft Corp. v. AT&T Corp. (2007)
Quanta Computer, Inc. v. LG Electronics, Inc. (2008)
Bilski v. Kappos (2010)
Global-Tech Appliances, Inc. v. SEB S.A. (2011)
Stanford University v. Roche Molecular Systems, Inc. (2011)
Microsoft Corp. v. i4i Ltd. Partnership (2011)
Mayo Collaborative Services v. Prometheus Laboratories, Inc. (2012)
Kappos v. Hyatt (2012)
Bowman v. Monsanto Co. (2013)
Gunn v. Minton (2013)
Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, Inc. (2013)
FTC v. Actavis, Inc. (2013)
Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank International (2014)
Akamai Techs., Inc. v. Limelight Networks, Inc. (2014)
Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc. v. Sandoz, Inc. (2015)
Kimble v. Marvel Entertainment, LLC (2015)
Apple Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co. (2016)
TC Heartland LLC v. Kraft Foods Group Brands LLC (2017)
Peter v. NantKwest, Inc. (2019)
Other trademark cases
Public displays and ceremonies Statutory religious exemptions Public funding Religion in public schools Private religious speech Internal church affairs Taxpayer standing Blue laws Other
Unprotected speech
Incitement and sedition Libel and false speechFighting words and the heckler's veto True threats Obscenity
Rosen v. United States (1896)
United States v. One Book Called Ulysses (S.D.N.Y. 1933)
Roth v. United States (1957)
One, Inc. v. Olesen (1958)
Smith v. California (1959)
Marcus v. Search Warrant (1961)
MANual Enterprises, Inc. v. Day (1962)
Jacobellis v. Ohio (1964)
Quantity of Books v. Kansas (1964)
Ginzburg v. United States (1966)
Memoirs v. Massachusetts (1966)
Redrup v. New York (1967)
Ginsberg v. New York (1968)
Stanley v. Georgia (1969)
United States v. Thirty-seven Photographs (1971)
Kois v. Wisconsin (1972)
Miller v. California (1973)
Paris Adult Theatre I v. Slaton (1973)
United States v. 12 200-ft. Reels of Film (1973)
Jenkins v. Georgia (1974)
Southeastern Promotions, Ltd. v. Conrad (1975)
Erznoznik v. City of Jacksonville (1975)
Young v. American Mini Theatres, Inc. (1976)
Vance v. Universal Amusement Co., Inc. (1980)
American Booksellers Ass'n, Inc. v. Hudnut (7th Cir. 1985)
People v. Freeman (Cal. 1988)
United States v. X-Citement Video, Inc. (1994)
Reno v. ACLU (1997)
United States v. Playboy Entertainment Group, Inc. (2000)
City of Los Angeles v. Alameda Books, Inc. (2002)
Ashcroft v. ACLU I (2002)
United States v. American Library Ass'n (2003)
Ashcroft v. ACLU II (2004)
Nitke v. Gonzales (S.D.N.Y. 2005)
United States v. Williams (2008)
American Booksellers Foundation for Free Expression v. Strickland (6th Cir. 2009)
United States v. Kilbride (9th Cir. 2009)
United States v. Stevens (2010)
Brown v. Entertainment Merchants Ass'n (2011)
FCC v. Fox Television Stations, Inc. (2012)
Free Speech Coalition v. Paxton (2025)
Speech integral to criminal conduct
Strict scrutiny Vagueness Symbolic speech versus conductContent-based restrictions Content-neutral restrictions
Compelled speech Compelled subsidy of others' speech
Příbuzné výrazy :
Hladanie
1.
Nové výrazy v kategórii:
Supreme Court of the United States
United States Reports
List of United States Supreme Court cases, volume 588
L. Ed. 2d
F.3d
Certiorari
Lanham Act
John Roberts
Clarence Thomas
Ruth Bader Ginsburg
Stephen Breyer
Samuel Alito
Sonia Sotomayor
Elena Kagan
Neil Gorsuch
Brett Kavanaugh
First Amendment to the United States Constitution
Lanham Act
Supreme Court of the United States
Trademarks
Lanham Act
United States Patent & Trademark Office
Viewpoint discrimination
Free Speech Clause
First Amendment to the United States Constitution
Lanham Act
United States Patent and Trademark Office
Matal v. Tam
Erik Brunetti
Natas Kaupas
FUCT (clothing)
Fuck
Trademark Trial and Appeal Board
United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
American Civil Liberties Union
Cohen v. California
Matal v. Tam
Andrei Iancu
Certiorari
Elena Kagan
Samuel Alito
John Roberts
Stephen Breyer
Sonia Sotomayor
List of United States Supreme Court cases, volume 588
United States Reports
The New York Times
NPR
USA Today
Fortune (magazine)
CNN
Template:USArticleI
Template talk:USArticleI
Special:EditPage/Template:USArticleI
Supreme Court of the United States
Article One of the United States Constitution
Article One of the United States Constitution#Clause 3: Apportionment of Representatives and taxes
Article One of the United States Constitution#Section 2: House of Representatives
Utah v. Evans
Department of Commerce v. New York
Trump v. New York
Article One of the United States Constitution#Clause 2: Qualifications of Members
Article One of the United States Constitution#Clause 3: Qualifications of senators
Powell v. McCormack
U.S. Term Limits, Inc. v. Thornton
Cook v. Gralike
Article One of the United States Constitution#Clause 1: Time, place, and manner of holding
Article One of the United States Constitution#Section 4: Congressional elections
Ex parte Siebold
Smiley v. Holm
U.S. Term Limits, Inc. v. Thornton
Arizona State Legislature v. Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission
Moore v. Harper
Speech or Debate Clause
Article One of the United States Constitution#Section 6:Compensation, privileges, and restrictions on holding civil office
Kilbourn v. Thompson
United States v. Johnson (1966)
Gravel v. United States
Origination Clause
Article One of the United States Constitution#Section 7: Bills
Flint v. Stone Tracy Co.
United States v. Munoz-Flores
Presentment Clause
Pocket Veto Case
Immigration and Naturalization Service v. Chadha
Clinton v. City of New York
Taxing and Spending Clause
Article One of the United States Constitution#Section 8: Powers of Congress
Hylton v. United States
Collector v. Day
Springer v. United States
Pollock v. Farmers' Loan & Trust Co.
Brushaber v. Union Pacific Railroad Co.
Bailey v. Drexel Furniture Co.
United States v. Butler
Helvering v. Davis
South Dakota v. Dole
National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius
Commerce Clause
Dormant Commerce Clause
Brown v. Maryland
Willson v. Black-Bird Creek Marsh Co.
Cooley v. Board of Wardens
Wabash, St. Louis & Pacific Railway Co. v. Illinois
Swift & Co. v. United States
George W. Bush & Sons Co. v. Malloy
Baldwin v. G.A.F. Seelig, Inc.
Edwards v. California
Southern Pacific Co. v. Arizona
Dean Milk Co. v. City of Madison
Miller Bros. Co. v. Maryland
Bibb v. Navajo Freight Lines, Inc.
National Bellas Hess v. Illinois
Pike v. Bruce Church, Inc.
Hughes v. Alexandria Scrap Corp.
Complete Auto Transit, Inc. v. Brady
Hunt v. Washington State Apple Advertising Commission
City of Philadelphia v. New Jersey
Exxon Corp. v. Governor of Maryland
Reeves, Inc. v. Stake
Kassel v. Consolidated Freightways Corp.
Sporhase v. Nebraska ex rel. Douglas
South-Central Timber Development, Inc. v. Wunnicke
Maine v. Taylor
Quill Corp. v. North Dakota
Chemical Waste Management, Inc. v. Hunt
Oregon Waste Systems, Inc. v. Department of Environmental Quality of Oregon
C&A Carbone, Inc. v. Town of Clarkstown
West Lynn Creamery, Inc. v. Healy
Granholm v. Heald
United Haulers Ass'n v. Oneida-Herkimer Solid Waste Management Authority
Department of Revenue of Kentucky v. Davis
Comptroller of the Treasury of Maryland v. Wynne
South Dakota v. Wayfair, Inc.
Tennessee Wine and Spirits Retailers Assn. v. Thomas
National Pork Producers Council v. Ross
Gibbons v. Ogden
Passenger Cases
Paul v. Virginia
Cooper Manufacturing Co. v. Ferguson
Kidd v. Pearson
In re Debs
United States v. E. C. Knight Co.
Champion v. Ames
Southern Railway Co. v. United States
Hoke v. United States
Houston East & West Texas Railway Co. v. United States
Hammer v. Dagenhart
Board of Trade of City of Chicago v. Olsen
A.L.A. Schechter Poultry Corp. v. United States
Gold Clause Cases
Panama Refining Co. v. Ryan
Carter v. Carter Coal Co.
NLRB v. Jones & Laughlin Steel Corp.
United States v. Carolene Products Co.
McGoldrick v. Berwind-White Coal Mining Co.
United States v. Darby Lumber Co.
Wickard v. Filburn
United States v. South-Eastern Underwriters Ass'n
North American Co. v. SEC
H.P. Hood & Sons v. Du Mond
Henderson v. United States (1950)
Canton Railroad Co. v. Rogan
Boynton v. Virginia
Heart of Atlanta Motel, Inc. v. United States
Katzenbach v. McClung
National League of Cities v. Usery
Commonwealth Edison Co. v. Montana
EEOC v. Wyoming
Garcia v. San Antonio Metropolitan Transit Authority
New York v. United States
United States v. Lopez
Seminole Tribe of Florida v. Florida
Reno v. Condon
United States v. Locke
United States v. Morrison
Gonzales v. Raich
National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius
Taylor v. United States (2016)
Article One of the United States Constitution#Enumerated powers
Legal Tender Cases
Knox v. Lee
Juilliard v. Greenman
Copyright Clause
Copyright Act of 1790
Wheaton v. Peters
Paige v. Banks
Globe Newspaper Co. v. Walker
History of United States patent law#Patent Act of 1793
Tyler v. Tuel
Evans v. Eaton (1818)
Evans v. Eaton (1822)
Evans v. Hettich
Patent infringement under United States law
Evans v. Jordan
Hollister v. Benedict & Burnham Manufacturing Co.
Rowell v. Lindsay
Schillinger v. United States
Bauer & Cie. v. O'Donnell
General Talking Pictures Corp. v. Western Electric Co.
Patentability
Pennock v. Dialogue
Hotchkiss v. Greenwood
O'Reilly v. Morse
Cochrane v. Deener
City of Elizabeth v. American Nicholson Pavement Co.
Egbert v. Lippmann
Consolidated Safety-Valve Co. v. Crosby Steam Gauge & Valve Co.
Voss v. Fisher
Copyright Act of 1831
Wheaton v. Peters
Backus v. Gould
Stephens v. Cady
Stevens v. Gladding
Little v. Hall
Paige v. Banks
Baker v. Selden
Callaghan v. Myers
Higgins v. Keuffel
Holmes v. Hurst
Brady v. Daly
Bolles v. Outing Co.
Mifflin v. R. H. White Company
Mifflin v. Dutton
Copyright Act of 1870
Perris v. Hexamer
Trade-Mark Cases
Merrell v. Tice
Schreiber v. Sharpless
Burrow-Giles Lithographic Co. v. Sarony
Thornton v. Schreiber
Banks v. Manchester
Callaghan v. Myers
Thompson v. Hubbard
Higgins v. Keuffel
Belford v. Scribner
Brady v. Daly
Bolles v. Outing Co.
Bleistein v. Donaldson Lithographing Co.
McLoughlin v. Raphael Tuck & Sons Co.
American Tobacco Co. v. Werckmeister
Werckmeister v. American Tobacco Co.
United Dictionary Co. v. G. & C. Merriam Co.
White-Smith Music Publishing Co. v. Apollo Co.
Dun v. Lumbermen's Credit Ass'n
Bobbs-Merrill Co. v. Straus
Scribner v. Straus
Bong v. Campbell Art Co.
Henry v. A.B. Dick Co.
Sherman Antitrust Act of 1890
Straus v. American Publishers Association
Interstate Circuit, Inc. v. United States
Fashion Originators' Guild of America v. FTC
United States v. Paramount Pictures, Inc.
Broadcast Music, Inc. v. CBS Inc.
International Copyright Act of 1891
Press Pub. Co. v. Monroe
McLoughlin v. Raphael Tuck & Sons Co.
American Tobacco Co. v. Werckmeister
White-Smith Music Publishing Co. v. Apollo Co.
Globe Newspaper Co. v. Walker
Bong v. Campbell Art Co.
Caliga v. Inter Ocean Newspaper Co.
Hills and Co. v. Hoover
Kalem Co. v. Harper Bros.
Copyright Act of 1909
Hills and Co. v. Hoover
DeJonge and Co. v. Breuker & Kessler Co.
Herbert v. Shanley Co.
Manners v. Morosco
Fox Film Corp. v. Knowles
Buck v. Jewell-LaSalle Realty Co.
Douglas v. Cunningham
Washingtonian Pub. Co. v. Pearson
Sheldon v. Metro-Goldwyn Pictures Corp.
Fred Fisher Music Co. v. M. Witmark & Sons
F. W. Woolworth Co. v. Contemporary Arts, Inc.
Mazer v. Stein
De Sylva v. Ballentine
Sears, Roebuck & Co. v. Stiffel Co.
Williams & Wilkins Co. v. United States
Patent misuse
Motion Picture Patents Co. v. Universal Film Manufacturing Co.
Morton Salt Co. v. G.S. Suppiger Co.
Clayton Antitrust Act of 1914
Fashion Originators' Guild of America v. FTC
Dowling v. United States (1985)
Lanham Act
Inwood Laboratories, Inc. v. Ives Laboratories, Inc.
San Francisco Arts & Athletics, Inc. v. United States Olympic Committee
Two Pesos, Inc. v. Taco Cabana, Inc.
Qualitex Co. v. Jacobson Products Co.
College Savings Bank v. Florida Prepaid Postsecondary Education Expense Board
Cooper Industries, Inc. v. Leatherman Tool Group, Inc.
TrafFix Devices, Inc. v. Marketing Displays, Inc.
Dastar Corp. v. Twentieth Century Fox Film Corp.
Moseley v. V Secret Catalogue, Inc.
Lexmark International, Inc. v. Static Control Components, Inc.#Scope of federal statutory torts: 2014 ruling at the Supreme Court
POM Wonderful LLC v. Coca-Cola Co.
Matal v. Tam
Romag Fasteners, Inc. v. Fossil, Inc.
Copyright Act of 1976
Zacchini v. Scripps-Howard Broadcasting Co.
Sony Corp. of America v. Universal City Studios, Inc.
Mills Music, Inc. v. Snyder
Harper & Row v. Nation Enterprises
Community for Creative Non-Violence v. Reid
Stewart v. Abend
Feist Publications, Inc., v. Rural Telephone Service Co.
Fogerty v. Fantasy, Inc.
Campbell v. Acuff-Rose Music, Inc.
Lotus Dev. Corp. v. Borland Int'l, Inc.
Quality King Distributors Inc., v. L'anza Research International Inc.
Feltner v. Columbia Pictures Television, Inc.
New York Times Co. v. Tasini
Eldred v. Ashcroft
MGM Studios, Inc. v. Grokster, Ltd.
Reed Elsevier, Inc. v. Muchnick
Golan v. Holder
Updating...x