Supreme Court Puts Utah Same-Sex Marriage on Hold

The Supreme Court on Monday put same-sex marriages on hold in Utah, at least while a federal appeals court more fully considers the issue.

The court issued a brief order blocking any new same-sex unions in the state.

The order grants an emergency appeal by the state following the Dec. 20 ruling by U.S. District Judge Robert Shelby that the state's ban on same-sex marriage violates gay and lesbian couples' constitutional rights.

More than 900 gay and lesbian couples have married since then.

The high court order will remain in effect until the Denver-based 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals decides whether to uphold Shelby's ruling.

The state's request to the Supreme Court was filed with Justice Sonia Sotomayor, who handles emergency appeals from Utah and the five other states in the 10th Circuit. Sotomayor turned the matter over to the entire court.

The action now shifts to Denver, where the appeals court will consider arguments from the state against same-sex marriage as well as from the three gay and lesbian couples who challenged the ban in support of Shelby's ruling. The appeals court had twice rebuffed the state's plea to stop gay weddings pending appeal.

Affirmative action foe wins California court fight

In a bitter fight over the effects of affirmative action, the California Supreme Court ruled Thursday that law school data on race, attendance and grades should be available to the public.

The unanimous decision represents a legal victory for a law professor seeking to test his notion that minority students are actually harmed by preferential admissions policies.

University of California, Los Angeles law professor Richard Sander created a firestorm when he published his "mismatch theory" in the Stanford Law Review in 2004.

Critics swiftly attacked his conclusions, saying Sander understated the positive effects of affirmative action and based his thinking on inadequate statistics.

To further his research, Sander sought data on ethnicity and scholastic performance compiled by the State Bar of California with a public records request in 2008. The state bar denied the request, prompting the lawsuit.

Information compiled by the bar, a branch of the state judiciary responsible with licensing and disciplining lawyers, is "unparalleled," Sander said after the ruling Thursday.

Texas Supreme Court tackles same-sex divorce

The issues of same-sex marriage and divorce are set to go before the Texas Supreme Court.

The court is scheduled to hear arguments Tuesday on whether Texas can grant divorces to same-sex couples who married elsewhere.

Both cases involve same-sex couples who married legally in Massachusetts. Texas approved a constitutional ban on gay marriage in 2005.

Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott argues that state law won't allow Texas to recognize the divorces because that would validate the marriage. The couples question whether the same-sex marriage ban applies to divorce and whether it conflicts with the U.S. Constitution.

The U.S. Supreme Court in June struck down parts of the federal Defense of Marriage Act because it treats same-sex couples unequally.

The Texas court is not expected to rule for several months.

NC court dumps speedway's suit over $80M deal

A North Carolina court says it will not revive a lawsuit from one of the country's largest auto racing track operators which says local officials reneged on millions of dollars in tax breaks for a new drag strip.

A three-judge state Court of Appeals panel ruled Tuesday against Speedway Motorsports Inc. and Charlotte Motor Speedway, which sued Cabarrus County.

The companies had threatened to move the 135,000-seat speedway and build a new drag strip somewhere other than the Charlotte region unless they got the tax breaks. They say they decided to build the drag strip and upgrade the speedway after an oral agreement for $80 million in tax breaks.

The appeals court says there was no binding contract since nothing was put in writing until after the drag strip opened.

Appeals court allows capital retrial of Wolfe

A federal appeals court will allow a capital murder case to proceed against an accused drug kingpin from northern Virginia.
In a 2-1 ruling, the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Richmond overturned a federal judge in Norfolk who had ordered a halt to the prosecution of Justin Wolfe and his immediate release.
That judge said misconduct by prosecutors in Prince William County made it impossible for Wolfe to get a fair trial.
But a majority on the appellate court disagreed. The judges ruled that a new trial can be done fairly. A dissenting judge said the misconduct was so bad that freeing Wolfe was the only proper outcome.
Wolfe was sent to death row in 2002 for a drug-related murder, but his original conviction and sentence were overturned.

Court shoots down Yakama tobacco company lawsuit

A federal judge has ruled that a tobacco manufacturer owned by a Yakama Nation tribal member must pay into an escrow account established under a 1998 settlement with big tobacco companies.
The 1998 settlement required big tobacco companies to pay money to 46 states each year to offset public health costs from their products. Smaller companies are required to pay into an escrow account, but that money could be returned eventually if no health claims are made.
King Mountain Tobacco claims it should be exempt from paying into the escrow accounts under the Yakama Nation's 1855 treaty with the federal government. King Mountain is owned by Yakama tribal member Delbert Wheeler.
U.S District Judge Lonny Suko ruled against the company on Friday.

China Trademark & Patent Law Office - Trademark and Patent

The process of registering a trademark in China might be quite like what it is in your own country. To have a registered trademark, you should file the trademark with the Chinese government. When it has passed the examination and publication, it becomes a registered trademark protected by the China Trademark Law. But before applying the trademark, there is some knowledge on the trademark that you would like to know.

A patent is a right granted to the owner of an invention to prevent others from making, using, importing or selling the invention without his permission. A patentable invention can be a product or a process that gives a new technical solution to a problem. It can also be a new method of doing things, the composition of a new product, or a technical improvement on how certain objects work. Once it is granted, its term of a patent is 20 years from the Date of Filing, subject to the payment of annual renewal fees.

http://www.ctplo.com/patent.html