U.S Supreme Court Roundup

High court rules for Connecticut company in trademark case WASHINGTON (AP) - The Supreme Court is making it easier to get certain monetary awards in trademark infringement lawsuits. The justices sided unanimously Thursday with a Connecticut company, Romag, in its lawsuit against fashion accessory company Fossil. Romag sells magnetic snaps that fasten wallets, handbags and other leather goods. In 2002, Fossil signed an agreement to use Romag fasteners in its products. But Romag later sued after learning that the factories Fossil hired in China to make its products were using counterfeit Romag fasteners. A jury sided with Romag but said the company hadn't proved that Fossil's trademark infringement was "willful." The Supreme Court said Thursday that under federal law, trademark infringement doesn't need to be found to be intentional for Romag to be awarded the profits Fossil earned thanks to its trademark violation. Fossil is based in Texas. Romag said in a statement that it was pleased with the decision, which will "incentivize manufacturers to protect against counterfeiting in their increasingly global supply chains and will help protect the rights of small intellectual property owners such as Romag." Supreme Court sides with government in immigration case WASHINGTON (AP) - The Supreme Court is making it harder for noncitizens who are authorized to live permanently in the United States to argue they should be allowed to stay in the country if they've committed crimes. The decision Thursday split the court 5-4 along ideological lines. The decision came in the case of Andre Barton, a Jamaican national and green card holder. In 1996, when he was a teenager, he was present when a friend fired a gun at the home of Barton's ex-girlfriend in Georgia. And in 2007 and 2008, he was convicted of drug possession in the state. His crimes made him eligible to be deported, and the government sought to remove him from the country in 2016. Barton argued he should be eligible to stay. Justice Brett Kavanaugh noted in his opinion for the court's conservatives that it was important that Barton's 1996 crime took place in the first seven years he was admitted to the country. Kavanaugh wrote that "when a lawful permanent resident has amassed a criminal record of this kind," immigration law makes them ineligible to ask to be allowed to stay in the country. @ROUND UP Briefs Headline:<*p(0,0,0,18.3,0,4,g(P,S))>Supreme Court won't review Rand Paul attacker's case BOWLING GREEN, Ky. (AP) - The U.S. Supreme Court has declined to review an appellate decision that mandates a new sentencing hearing for the man who tackled U.S. Sen. Rand Paul and broke his ribs. The Supreme Court's denial this week doesn't constitute an opinion on the merits of the appeal by Rene Boucher, the Daily News reported. Attorneys for Boucher argued that a resentencing hearing violates his constitutional rights entitling him to due process and protecting him against double jeopardy. Boucher has already served a 30-day sentence for the 2017 attack outside the senator's home. Boucher tackled Paul in anger over a lawn maintenance issue along their property line, breaking six of Paul's ribs. Paul suffered bouts of pneumonia and underwent surgery to remove part of his damaged lung. A three-judge panel of the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled last year that there was "no compelling justification" for Boucher's sentence. The judges called the sentence "well-below-guidelines" and ordered a resentencing. Federal prosecutors said 21 months would be a more appropriate sentence after Boucher pleaded guilty to assaulting a member of Congress. The Supreme Court's ruling sends the case back before U.S. District Court in Bowling Green and Special Judge Marianne Battani, who imposed the initial sentence. Published: Mon, Apr 27, 2020