The California Court of Appeal has held that employers’ itemized wage payment statements do not have to include the monetary value of an employee’s accrued vacation or paid time off (PTO). The decision in Soto v. Motel 6 Operating, L.P. held that, although such amounts are “wages” under California law, an employer does not have to itemize the value of the balance due until the end of employment.
The election of Donald Trump to be the 45th President and the retention of majorities in the House and Senate by the Republican Party were a surprise to most, but in the tradition of our country, the days after are a time for organizing to do the people’s business. From large corporations to small nonprofits, from urban centers to rural communities, the 2016 elections will have an impact across all sectors of the economy and globally as well.
A series of recent decisions have heightened the standard for obtaining preliminary injunctive relief for trademark infringement. This trend presents unique challenges for brand owners seeking to enjoin unauthorized “holdover” use of a trademark by former franchisees or licensees. This situation commonly arises when a franchisee or licensee continues using a franchisor or licensor’s trademarks following termination of a franchise or license agreement.
Under the test for preliminary injunctive relief in most jurisdictions, a plaintiff must establish:
The False Claims Act imposes liability on persons and companies who defraud the government of monies, whether it is by receiving monies based on false statements or material omissions, or avoiding the payment of monies through false statements or omissions. The statute permits both private parties (whistleblowers) and the government to bring actions against the perpetrators of such fraud in order for the government to collect damages, a portion of which will be paid to the whistleblower, if one is involved.
Long lines and waiting for security inspections are the new normal not only at airports and stadiums, but also at office buildings and theatres—just to name a few places. According to the plaintiff in Rodriquez v. Nike Retail Services, Inc., N.D. Cal. Case No. 5:14-cv-01508, he and other Nike retail employees also had to wait for security inspections when they left for breaks or after their shifts at Nike’s retail stores.
New York, NY — On September 21, the Fashion Law Institute at Fordham filed an amicus brief with the Supreme Court of the United States in the matter of Star Athletica LLC v. Varsity Brands, Inc., in support of continuing copyright protection for designs incorporated into useful articles, including the cheerleader uniform designs at issue in the litigation.
What Made News?
Last month, the US International Trade Commission issued a decision invalidating a trademark for Converse’s iconic Chuck Taylor sneaker. Although Converse did win some of its claims, the ITC decision overall represents a potentially significant setback for Converse after the company took aggressive action to try to stop the sale of shoes that Converse claimed infringed its rights in the Chuck Taylor design.
What’s New? (The GDPR.)
Fashion and luxury goods companies need to take heed of yet another data protection regulation. This one could substantially impact them if they collect, process, or transfer EU individuals’ personal data, or plan to do so at some point soon. Specifically, the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) is the EU’s new data protection law, recently and finally entered into law. It replaces the old EU data protection regime established by the Data Protection Directive (95/46/EC).
Be skeptical of suppliers offering to “help” keep duties low.
Thoroughly investigate any indications of double invoicing.
Two China-based clothing manufacturers, Motives Far East and Motives China Limited, and their affiliated US importer, Motives, Incorporated (collectively “Motives”), agreed to pay nearly $13.4 million for engaging in a double invoicing scheme designed to defraud the United States out of millions of dollars in customs duties, according to US Immigration and Customs Enforcement's Homeland Security Investigations directorate, and US Customs
In the recent case of International Information Systems Security Certification Consortium v. Security University, LLC, the Second Circuit articulated its test for analyzing nominative fair use claims in trademark infringement cases. While we now know the Second Circuit’s test, the case also highlights a notable circuit split between the Ninth, Second, and Third Circuits regarding nominative fair use. As a result, companies intending to rely on a nominative fair use defense may have varying success depending on the jurisdiction.