Bishop Ireton football in Alexandria, Virginia

In the News:

  • Decision to replace Bishop Ireton football Coach Tony Verducci frustrates players, parents Weeks after he led the Cardinals back to the VISAA Div. I title game, the ninth year head coach was let go by the school as a result of his decision to accept a job in Norfolk. (WaPo)
  • Lawsuit: No-fly list has left Muslim Air Force veteran detained in Turkey Saadiq Long, who was born in Oklahoma and lives in Qatar, is suing to be removed from the list. Lawsuit being heard in Alexandria federal court. (WaPo)
  • Record high temps being set today For the third day in a row, temperatures are climbing to record warmth. (Capital Weather Gang)
  • Protesters call for gun reforms outside the NRA headquarters in Fairfax About 200 protesters lined the street in front of the National Rifle Association’s headquarters in Fairfax County, calling for “sensible gun reform.” (WTOP)
  • A tip on getting through crowded airport security faster this Holiday season After the recent terrorist attack in Paris, and especially the alleged bombing of a Russian airliner over Egypt last month, security measures at U.S. airports are tighter, and that could make it longer to get on your holiday-season flights. (WTOP)

Tweet of the Day

Recognize the location? For more about this tweet, see this link and this link.

Albert Bryan Courthouse Alexandria, Virginia

This is an update to this post, this post, and this post.

This lawsuit is occurring at the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia located here in Alexandria. The lawsuit stems from this decision by the USPTO Trademark Board.

Via CNS News

A federal judge seems to think Native Americans offended by the Washington Redskins team name are properly being sued by the NFL franchise.

Judge Gerald Bruce Lee suggested during a hearing Friday that it would be unprecedented to dismiss the team’s lawsuit against five Native Americans who complained about the name to the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.

A trademark office board decided in June to cancel some of the Redskins’ trademarks, citing federal regulations against protecting words and images that are disparaging or offensive.

The team could have challenged the ruling in appellate court in Washington, but sought help instead in a venue that gives it more options, by going to a trial court to sue the Native Americans who complained in the first place.[…]

The judge seemed to agree and said he would issue a written ruling at a later date.

The team’s trademark protection remains in place while the issue makes its way through the court system, and the trademark board’s ruling does not apply to the team’s current logo, which includes an American Indian head in profile.

Read more at this link.

Albert Bryan Courthouse Alexandria, Virginia

This back and forth is going to go on for a long time.

Via WaPo

The Washington Redskins filed a motion late Friday defending their lawsuit in federal court against a group of Native Americans over the team’s trademark protections.

The motion argues that the Redskins chose the right courthouse to file their lawsuit and the correct set of plaintiffs to sue in U.S. District Court in Alexandria, Va., possibly the team’s last legal recourse to salvage its federal trademark protections.

The Redskins’ filing is a response to a motion to dismiss the case made last month by the five Native Americans who won a decision by the federal Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, a part of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. The board found in June that the team’s name and logos are disparaging to American Indians and scheduled the Redskins’ trademark protections to be stripped. Since that decision, the Redskins have been able to keep the trademarks while the team makes its appeal.

In an effort to reverse the trademark board’s decision, the Redskins filed a lawsuit against the Native Americans. But last month, the defendants, led by Amanda Blackhorse, a member of the Navajo Nation, argued in their motion to dismiss that the Redskins do not have the legal right to sue them because they are not “parties in interest” who can be targeted in a trademark case based on federal law.

Read more at this link.

Eastern District of Virginia Courthouse in Alexandria

We follow all cases happening at the federal courthouse in Carlyle.

Via WaPo

The Native Americans fighting the Washington Redskins over trademark protections filed a motion in U.S. District Court in Alexandria on Monday, asking the court to toss the team’s lawsuit against them.

The motion argues that team owner Dan Snyder doesn’t have the legal right to sue the five Native Americans who won a key decision by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office earlier this year. The patent office ruled that the name and logo are disparaging and canceled the team’s trademark registration.

The team sued last month, asserting that “Redskins” is not offensive and that the federal agency erred in stripping away six Redskins trademarks.

Snyder has promised never to change the team name, which he contends honors Native Americans. The team has cited polls that have shown that a majority of Native Americans or Americans do not find the team name offensive.

In their motion against the NFL giant, the Native Americans argue that, based on federal law, they are not “parties in interest” who can be sued in a trademark case. The Native Americans — led by Amanda Blackhorse, a social worker and member of the Navajo Nation — have no legal or economic interest in wresting control of the Redskins trademark for themselves as a competing business might.

Read more at this link.

Big new case at the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia in Carlyle.

Via David Sherfinski at The Washington Times:

A group of doctors is suing Virginia over a provision in its heath care law that forbids medical professionals from offering certain new services or purchasing certain types of equipment without first getting an official go-ahead from the state Department of Health.

The lawsuit, filed Tuesday in federal court in Alexandria, charges Virginia with violating the Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution — ironically the same charge the state is leveling at the federal government in requiring most Americans to purchase health insurance or face a penalty.

Plaintiffs in the case against Virginia argue that they are not able to import goods like MRI machines or CT scanners via interstate commerce because of Virginia’s “certificate of need” requirement for pre-clearance of new services or equipment with the state Health Department, which some say favors already-existing businesses — or the ones with the right connections.

“The nation may be divided over the federal government’s role in healthcare, but we should all be able to agree that state governments should not be harming patients by limiting their options just to funnel millions of dollars to politically connected businesses,” said Chip Mellor, president and general counsel of the Institute for Justice, which joined forces with Colon Health Centers of America and Progressive Radiology in filing the lawsuit.

Founded in 1991, the Arlington-based group describes itself as “the nation’s leading legal advocate for economic liberty.”

The irony of the situation was not lost on Robert McNamara, a lawyer for the group, which has filed a friend-of-the-court brief arguing against the federal health care overhaul. A tremendous amount of attention has been focused on the federal government’s role in health care over the past three years, he said outside of U.S. District Courthouse in Alexandria on Tuesday.

Read more at this link.

From time to time, we like to bring to light some major cases happening at the U.S. Federal courthouse in Alexandria  which are making news. The courthouse, which just happens to be in our neighborhood of Carlyle, has had a number of famous cases including the Zacaharias Moussaoui & John Walker Lindh trials.

Currently, the case of an American Muslim male stranded in Kuwait is being heard at the court:

A 19-year-old American Muslim detained and questioned in Kuwait is suing the U.S. government, claiming it is refusing to let him fly home because he is on a “no-fly” list.

Stuck in limbo between the country he calls home and the place he was visiting on what his lawyer describes as a journey of self-discovery, Gulet Mohamed of Alexandria, Virginia, has been trapped in Kuwait for nearly a month, according to a lawsuit filed Tuesday in federal court in Virginia.

“No-fly” lists were set up to protect Americans against potential threats. They are designed to prevent terrorist suspects from boarding planes to and from the United States.

But Mohamed’s lawyer, Gadeir Abbas, says in the lawsuit that the U.S. government is impeding his client’s basic right to return and live freely in the United States. Abbas is a staff attorney for the Counsel on American-Islamic Relations.

At a hearing Tuesday in U.S. District Court in Alexandria, Virginia, Judge Anthony J. Trenga told the government that it should make arrangements to allow Mohamed to return before the end of this week unless it could produce evidence against him.

The lawsuit says Mohamed came to the United States from Somalia with his family when he was just 3 years old, grew up in Virginia and is now a naturalized citizen. In March of 2009, Mohamed’s curiosity led him halfway around the world to visit relatives living overseas and to learn Arabic, according to the lawsuit.

In our latest installment of we watch the news and the court dockets so you don’t have to…

In case you missed what’s going on at the Federal Courthouse in Carlyle (a.k.a. United States Court for the Eastern District of Virginia) there has been a development concerning the election this fall in the eighth district of Virginia.

Alex Hampl at has the details:

On June 9, there was a Republican primary election to select their candidate to run for Congress in Virginia’s Eighth District. That day was also the deadline for independent candidates to file their petitions to run against incumbent Democrat Jim Moran.

In July, the Virginia State Board of Elections certified three qualified candidates whose names will be printed on the ballot: Republican J. Patrick Murray; Democrat James P. “Jim” Moran Jr and Independent Green Party Candidate J. Ron Fisher. Libertarian Party of Virginia Candidate Matthew R. Mosley was not certified as eligible to run because his petition did not contain the required 1,000 signatures of qualified voters in the Eighth District. The Libertarian Party of Virginia sued the State Board of Elections and is awaiting a ruling from federal court in the Eastern District of Virginia.

Virginia Code 24.2-506 says, “Each signature on the petition shall have been witnessed by a person who is himself a qualified voter, or qualified to register to vote, for the office for which he is circulating the petition and whose affidavit to that effect appears on each page of the petition.”

According to the State Board of Elections, a number of signatures on Mosley’s petition were collected and witnessed by people who do not reside in the Eighth District, and were disqualified. The LPVA lawsuit says that the requirement that a circulator of a petition live in the district for which the candidate is running for office is overly restrictive.

“The lawsuit has been filed, and we are awaiting answers from the Commonwealth of Virginia,” said Chuck Moulton, LPVA’s Communications Director. “There will be a court ruling on the injunction before the ballots are printed.”

Even if LPVA prevails, and the signatures are allowed, Mosley has an additional problem: he lives in Virginia’s Tenth Congressional District, not the Eight. Virginia Code 24.2-501 says, “It shall be a requirement of candidacy for any office of the Commonwealth, or of its governmental units, that a person must file a written statement under oath, on a form prescribe4d by the State Board, that he is qualified to vote for and hold the office for which he is a candidate.”

The LPVA is attempting to address this issue with another lawsuit. “There is another case just like this involving a Seventh Congressional District U.S. House candidate (an Independent) who lives in the First Congressional District,” Moulton said. “That case was filed in federal court in Richmond, while Matt’s case was filed in federal court in Alexandria.”

Since absentee voting begins on Sept. 17, the ballots must be printed and available to voters prior to that. Electoral Board sources said that a court ruling must be handed down by Sept. 3.

Read more of the article at this link

Real Time Analytics