Here are the materials in Delebreau v. Danforth:
Lower court materials here.
Here are the materials in Delebreau v. Danforth:
Lower court materials here.
Here are the materials in BP America v. Yerington Paiute Tribe (D. Nev.):
42 Tribal Judge Response to 38
59 Plaintiffs Consolidated Response
63 Tribal Court Reply in Support of 53
64 Tribe Reply in Support of 51
80 Plaintiff Motion to Amend Judgment
82 Tribal Judge Response to 80
Prior post here.
Here are updated materials in Williams & Cochrane LLP v. Quechan Tribe of the Fort Yuma Reservation (S.D. Cal.):
138-1 W&C Motion to Dismiss Quechan Counterclaims [94]
148 W&C Response to Quechan MTD [115]
150 W&C Opposition to Rosette Motion to Strike [109]
151 W&C Opposition to Rosette MTD [110]
161 Rosette Reply in Support of 109
162 Quechan Reply in Support of 115
167 W&C Reply in Support of 94
Prior posts here.
UPDATE:
Here are the materials in Oneida Indian Nation v. Phillips (N.D. N.Y.):
Seth W. R. Brickey has published “Rent-A-Tribe: Using Tribal Immunity to Shield Patents from Administrative Review” in the Washington Law Review.
Here is the abstract:
In 2017, Allergan Pharmaceuticals entered into an agreement with the Saint Regis Mohawk Tribe (SRMT). Allergan agreed to assign several patents to SRMT and to pay an initial sum of $13.75 million and annual royalties of approximately $15 million. SRMT, in exchange, licensed the rights to use the patents back to Allergan and agreed not to waive its tribal immunity in any administrative proceeding challenging the patents. Two outcomes were expected as a result of this Allergan-Mohawk agreement. First, Allergan would retain the rights to manufacture and market a highly profitable drug while insulating the underlying patents from an unforgiving administrative inter partes review (IPR). Second, SRMT would embark on a new business venture of collecting and relicensing patents from third parties, effectively “renting out” its sovereign immunity. The response from lawmakers, the judiciary, the executive branch, and the public at large was acrimonious. The agreement was branded in public forums as a “sham” and the Patent Trial and Appeal Board held the patents assigned to SRMT were not shielded by tribal immunity. This Comment argues the Allergan-Mohawk agreement is a legally effective means of avoiding IPR. Absent an express waiver of tribal immunity by Congress or the tribe itself, a tribe may not be subject to a private claim. This rule extends to IPR proceedings which closely parallel private suits. Therefore, contracts like the Allergan-Mohawk agreement effectively shield patents from IPR.
Here are the materials in Luiz v. Northern Circle Indian Housing Authority (N.D. Cal.):
Here is the unpublished opinion in Laake v. Turning Stone Casino.
Briefs:
Here are the materials in Northern Natural Gas Company v. 80 Acres of Land in Thurston County, Neb. (D. Neb.):
Prior post here.
Here are the materials in Wilhite v. Awe Kualawaache Care Center (D. Mont.):
29 Motion to Dismiss – sovereign immunity
Prior post here.
Here are the materials in JW Gaming Development LLC v. James (N.D. Cal.):
You must be logged in to post a comment.