Is this you? As a journalist, you can create a free Muck Rack account to customize your profile, list your contact preferences, and upload a portfolio of your best work.
Claim your profile
Articles by Spencer McManus
'Teradyne' and the Fair Use Defense in Software Copyright Cases
Last month, in an unpublished memorandum disposition, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirmed a significant district court decision granting summary judgment, on fair use grounds, to a software company that had copied portions of its competitor’s copyrighted computer code. Teradyne v. Astronics, 9th Cir. No. 24-239, C.D. Cal. No. CV 20-2713. The decision illustrates the potential strength of the fair use defense in software cases, even in those involving direct competitors.
Defending Reproductive Rights - Family and Matrimonial - United States
United States: Defending Reproductive Rights 02 July 2021 by Spencer McManus (San Francisco) , Karen Leung (San Francisco) and Derek Foran (San Francisco) Morrison & Foerster LLP Your LinkedIn Connections with the authors To print this article, all you need is to be registered or login on Mondaq.com.
Northern District Of California Grants Permanent Injunction For National Abortion Federation
United States: Northern District Of California Grants Permanent Injunction For National Abortion Federation 09 April 2021 by Derek F. Foran , James R. Sigel , Spencer McManus and Randy Zack Morrison & Foerster LLP Your LinkedIn Connections with the authors To print this article, all you need is to be registered or login on Mondaq.com. Judge William H.
New Mexico’s 2020 Primary in the Wake of the Coronavirus
Lawfare is partnering with theStanford-MIT Healthy Elections Project to produce aseries on election integrity in the midst of the coronavirus crisis. The Healthy Elections Project aims to assist election officials and the public as the nation confronts the challenges that the coronavirus pandemic poses for election administration.
New Mexico’s 2020 Primary in the Wake of the Coronavirus
Published by The Lawfare Institute in Cooperation With Lawfare is partnering with theStanford-MIT Healthy Elections Project to produce aseries on election integrity in the midst of the coronavirus crisis. The Healthy Elections Project aims to assist election officials and the public as the nation confronts the challenges that the coronavirus pandemic poses for election administration.
The 2020 Minnesota Primary in the Wake of the Coronavirus
Lawfare is partnering with the Stanford-MIT Healthy Elections Project to produce a series on election integrity in the midst of the coronavirus crisis. The Healthy Elections Project aims to assist election officials and the public as the nation confronts the challenges that the coronavirus pandemic poses for election administration.
The 2020 Minnesota Primary in the Wake of the Coronavirus
Lawfare is partnering with the Stanford-MIT Healthy Elections Project to produce a series on election integrity in the midst of the coronavirus crisis. The Healthy Elections Project aims to assist election officials and the public as the nation confronts the challenges that the coronavirus pandemic poses for election administration.
Ninth Circuit Confirms No Choice-of-Law Analysis Necessary To Certify Settlement Class
Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice): Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below. Mondaq has a "free to view" business model.
Ninth Circuit Confirms No Choice-Of-Law Analysis Necessary To Certify Settlement Class | JD Supra
The Ninth Circuit recently issued an opinion holding that district courts usually need not engage in rigorous analysis under the predominance inquiry of Rule 23(b)(3) before certifying a settlement class. In Jabbari v. Farmer,[1] the Ninth Circuit affirmed the district court’s certification of a settlement class that asserted both a federal claim and state law claims, rejecting objectors’ protests that differences in state law claims precluded certification.
California Supreme Court: Civil Penalty Claims Brought By Government Under UCL And FAL Should Be Determined By Court—Not Jury - Government, Public Sector - United States
To print this article, all you need is to be registered or login on Mondaq.com. The California Supreme Court has confirmed that claims for civil penalties brought by government entities under California's Unfair Competition Law ("UCL")1 and False Advertising Law ("FAL")2 should be decided by a judge—not a jury. See Nationwide Biweekly Administration Inc. et al. v. Superior Court of Alameda County (People, Real Party in Interest), Cal. Sup. Ct., S250047.
California Supreme Court: Civil Penalty Claims Brought By Government Under UCl And FAL Should Be Determined By Court—Not Jury | JD Supra
Updated: May 25, 2018: JD Supra is a legal publishing service that connects experts and their content with broader audiences of professionals, journalists and associations.
Show More
loading
Actions
Is this you?
As a journalist, you can create a free Muck Rack account to customize your profile, list your contact preferences, and upload a portfolio of your best work.Get in touch with Spencer
Contact Spencer, search articles and posts on X, monitor coverage, and track replies from one place.
Learn more about Muck Rack