Troy Eid: “President Trump: Make Bears Ears your legacy”

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here.

House Elections Subcommittee Field Hearing at Standing Rock

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here.

Third Circuit Briefs in United States v. Neff [third-party use of tribal immunity defense; “rent-a-tribe”]

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here are the materials in United States v. Neff:

Hallinan Appellant Brief

Neff Appellant Brief

US Answer Brief

Neff Reply

Hallinan Reply

Detailed Complaint to OIG re: David Bernhardt

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here:

CLC Complaint re Bernhardt

More News Articles on Natives and Basketball

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Must be basketball season….

From High Country News: Native American athletes and fans face ongoing racism

From the NYTs: Mike Budenholzer Has Come a Long Way From Bucket of Blood Street

MSU Bull Moose & NALSA Presentation

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Doug Craven (LTBB) and Trevor VanDyke (Mich. DNR) — The Intersections Between Conservation Law & Indigenous Law

SCOTUS Denies Cert in St. Regis Mohawk v. Mylan

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here is today’s order list.

Cert stage materials in that case are here.

Fletcher Testimony on the RESPECT Act before the House Indigenous Peoples Subcommittee

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Worth a look, most especially for Dylan Minor’s excellent artistic rendering of the treaty cessions by Michigan Indian nations (skip ahead to page 15); available on SSRN here.

It was cherry blossom time, too!

And on the way over, we happened by the Japanese Internment Memorial, noting that the federal government placed many of the concentration camps on Indian reservations: Continue reading →

Federal Circuit Decides Cloud v. US [Pro Se Indian Tucker Act Claim]

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here is the unpublished opinion in Cloud v. United States.

Briefs:

cloud-brief.pdf

federal-brief.pdf

Allergan & St. Regis Mohawk Cert Petition on “Blocking Patent” Doctrine

Matthew L.M. Fletcher

Here is the petition in Allergan Inc. v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA Inc.:

Allergan & SRMT Cert Petition

Questions presented:

Whether the Federal Circuit erred in this case, as it did in Acorda Therapeutics, Inc. v. Roxanne Laboratories, Inc., 903 F.3d 1310 (Fed. Cir. 2018), in holding that objective indicia of non-obviousness may be partially or entirely discounted where the development of the invention was allegedly “blocked” by the existence of a prior patent, and, if so, further erred by making an implicit finding that an invention was “blocked,” without requiring evidence of or making a finding of actual blocking, and in the face of evidence to the contrary.