Maria Santos

Correspondent

Maria Santos

White House correspondent, covers patent, trade and regulatory news

Business & Regulatory patent

Decisions covered by Maria Santos

639 decisions
Apr 7 2026
11th Cir. 24-11260 Published

JEFFREY HAYES v. DIRECTOR, OWCP UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR COWIN & COMPANY, INC

The Eleventh Circuit vacated a Benefits Review Board decision, clarifying that the Black Lung Benefits Act does not require a miner to prove employment for a full 365-day calendar year to count as a year of service. Instead, the court held that working 125 days in coal mines during a calendar year is sufficient to establish a year of employment for benefit eligibility.

Apr 6 2026
9th Cir. 2:23-cv-01679-BJR Unpublished

Bramblett v. Allied World Specialty Insurance Co.

The Ninth Circuit reversed a district court's summary judgment, holding that an insurer breached its contract by refusing to defend an insured when the policy's sexual abuse exclusion was ambiguous. The court ruled that Washington law requires insurers to defend claims that could conceivably be covered, even if some allegations fall under an exclusion.

Apr 3 2026
3rd Cir. 4:22-cv-01948) Panel Decision

SHARON KINNER v. PORTFOLIO RECOVERY ASSOCIATES, LLC

The Third Circuit affirmed summary judgment for Portfolio Recovery Associates, LLC, holding that withdrawing a debt collection complaint without prejudice does not constitute a favorable termination under the Pennsylvania Dragonetti Act. The court reasoned that the statutory requirement for a claim to terminate in the plaintiff's favor was not met because the withdrawal was not an abandonment in bad faith.

Apr 3 2026
3rd Cir. 1:23-cv-02402 Panel Decision

JIM WANG; DEAN WANG; YU BAI v. MASERATI NORTH AMERICA, INC.; JOHN DOES 1-10

The Third Circuit affirmed summary judgment for Maserati because the plaintiffs failed to provide expert testimony proving a vehicle defect caused a garage fire. The court clarified that while expert testimony is not always required for complex instruments, it is necessary when the average juror cannot deduce the cause of failure without technical knowledge.

Apr 3 2026
11th Cir. 6:23-cv-01971-JA-LHP Per Curiam

KENNETH BYNDOM v. WAFFLE HOUSE, INC a Foreign Profit Corporation EAST COAST WAFFLES, INC a Foreign Profit Corporation

The Eleventh Circuit affirmed summary judgment for Waffle House, ruling that an employee's stabbing of a customer was an independent criminal act outside the scope of employment. The court held that the employer was not liable under Florida law because the assault was not reasonably foreseeable and the employee had stepped away from his duties at the time of the incident.

Apr 3 2026
10th Cir. 1:24-CV-02873-CNS Panel Decision

In re: DEVIN DAVID SHARP; AMY BETH SHARP Debtors. ------------------------------ AMY BETH SHARP v. NICK COX; GEORGIA FORSEE

The Tenth Circuit affirmed a bankruptcy court ruling that unpaid salaries owed to former employees are nondischargeable in bankruptcy. The court held that the debtor forfeited a key statutory defense by failing to raise it in the lower court and failed to meet the high burden of proving plain error.

Apr 3 2026
3rd Cir. 25-3196 Panel Decision

BRAHEEM HARTLEY v. DELAWARE COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA; DELAWARE COUNTY TAX CLAIM BUREAU; JANINE HEINLEIN, Upset Tax Sale Coordinator Delaware County Tax Claim Bureau

The Third Circuit affirmed the dismissal of a pro se homeowner's federal lawsuit challenging a state court tax sale ruling. The court held that the Rooker-Feldman doctrine barred the federal claims because they sought to overturn a state judgment, and res judicata precluded claims that were or could have been litigated in state court.

Apr 3 2026
9th Cir. 3:23-cv-05027-TMC Unpublished

GULLIVER'S TAVERN, INC. D/B/A FOXY LADY v. FOXY LADY, INC. D/B/A FOXY LADY COFFEE

The Ninth Circuit affirmed the district court's denial of a default judgment on trademark infringement claims, finding no clear error in the lower court's analysis of likelihood of confusion. The appellate panel upheld the dismissal of the plaintiff's claims, ruling that the marks were not sufficiently similar and the businesses were geographically isolated.