FindLaw Opinion Summaries - 7th Circuit COA

US v. Owens, No. 09-1279

2009-11-06T22:32:14Z

District court's imposition of an enhancement under U.S.S.G. section 2G2.2(b)(3)(B) on a defendant convicted of transportation and possession of child pornography is affirmed where, although defendant did not have an explicit agreement or precise bargain with the woman, the content of his conversations lead to the conclusion that he reasonably anticipated or believed that his exchange of child pornography would result in a sexual encounter with the woman and her children.

Read US v. Owens, No. 09-1279

Appellate Information

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Indiana, Indianapolis Bend Division

Decided November 6, 2009

Judges

Before: Ripple, Kanne, and Sykes, Circuit Judges

Opinion by Kanne, Circuit Judge

Lake v. Neal, No. 08-3765

2009-11-06T22:28:24Z

In plaintiff's class action lawsuit against the Chicago Board of Election Commissioners (Board) alleging violation of the Driver's Privacy Protection Act (DPPA), dismissal of the complaint is affirmed as, since a voter registration form filled out at the DMV is not a motor vehicle record under the DPPA, the Board could not have violated the DPPA by disclosing plaintiff's personal information to the extent that it did.

Read Lake v. Neal, No. 08-3765

Appellate Information

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division

Decided November 6, 2009

Judges

Before: Easterbrook, Chief Judge, and Evans and Bauer, Circuit Judges

Opinion by Evans, Circuit Judge

US v. Schultz, No. 09-1192

2009-11-06T16:06:45Z

District court's conviction of defendant for being a felon in possession of a firearm is affirmed where: 1) the 18 U.S.C. section 921(a)(20)(A) exclusion does not apply to defendant's predicate conviction; 2) section 921(a)(20)(A) is not impermissibly vague, as an ordinary individual would have notice that the exception applies only if he or she committed an enumerated or similar offense related to the regulation of business practices; 3) the district court did not clearly err in denying defendant's request to conduct a Franks hearing; and 4) defendant's claim that district court erred in denying his motion to suppress the statements that he made when his home was searched is without merit.

Read US v. Schultz, No. 09-1192

Appellate Information

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Indiana, South Bend Division

Decided November 5, 2009

Judges

Before: Bauer, Rovner, and Williams, Circuit Judges

Opinion by Bauer, Circuit Judge

Schrock v. Learning Curve Int'l, Inc., No. 08-1296

2009-11-06T16:02:50Z

In plaintiff's copyright infringement action against defendant who had hired him to take photos of the "Thomas & Friends" toy train characters for use in promotions, district court's dismissal of his complaint is reversed where: 1) the photos qualify for the limited derivative-work copyright provided by section 103(b) as plaintiff's artistic and technical choices combine to create a two-dimensional image that is subtly but nonetheless sufficiently his own; and 2) district court erred in concluding that plaintiff needed defendant's permission to copyright the photos, as there is nothing in the Copyright Act requiring the author of a derivative work to obtain permission to copyright his work from the owner of the copyright in the underlying work.

Read Schrock v. Learning Curve Int'l, Inc., No. 08-1296

Appellate Information

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Indiana, Eastern Division

Decided November 5, 2009

Judges

Before: Flaum, Sykes, and Williams, Circuit Judges

Opinion by Sykes, Circuit Judge

US v. Bell, No. 07-3806

2009-11-06T15:59:09Z

Denial of defendant's motion to suppress evidence of crack cocaine and firearm found during search of his home is reversed as the warrant was not supported by probable cause because an affidavit failed to establish the reliability of the informants, and law enforcement officers did not sufficiently corroborate the informants' reports.

Read US v. Bell, No. 07-3806

Appellate Information

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of Illinois

Decided November 5, 2009

Judges

Before: Manion, Wood, and Williams, Circuit Judges

Opinion by Wiliams, Circuit Judge

US v. Hampton, No. 07-3134

2009-11-04T22:38:24Z

Defendant's conviction for possession of a firearm by a felon is affirmed where: 1) officers had reasonable suspicion to stop the SUV in which defendant was riding; and 2) there was sufficient evidence to show that the defendant constructively or actually possessed the gun. However, the sentence of 387 months' imprisonment is vacated and remanded where, although the district court was correct that a conviction for residential entry in Indiana qualifies as a "violent felony" for the purposes of the Armed Career Criminal Act, defendant's conviction for criminal recklessness in Indiana does not qualify.

Read US v. Hampton, No. 07-3134

Appellate Information

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Indiana, Indianapolis Division

Decided November 4, 2009

Judges

Before: Easterbrook, Chief Judge, and Posner and Williams, Circuit Judges

Opinion by Wiliams, Circuit Judge

US v. Vaughn, No. 08-4169

2009-11-03T13:44:09Z

District court's conviction of defendant for drug related crimes is affirmed where: 1) evidence was sufficient to prove that defendant possessed the rifle in furtherance of a drug trafficking crime; and 2) defendant's admissions regarding the amount of drugs were sufficient to support the district court's relevant conduct findings.

Read US v. Vaughn, No. 08-4169

Appellate Information

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Indiana, South Bend Division

Decided November 3, 2009

Judges

Before: Kanne, Wood, and Rovner, Circuit Judges

Opinion by Rovner, Circuit Judge

US v. Kenerson, No. 09-1183

2009-10-30T14:13:05Z

District court's denial of defendant's motion to suppress evidence of crack cocaine found in his back jean pocket during a Terry stop is affirmed where: 1) officers had probable cause to stop defendant's vehicle; 2) officers had reasonable suspicion of safety risk for a Terry frisk; and 3) once the officer saw the crack containers in plain view, he had probable cause to seize the contraband and arrest defendant.

Read US v. Kenerson, No. 09-1183

Appellate Information

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of Illinois

Decided October 30, 2009

Judges

Before: Posner, Flaum, and Rovner, Circuit Judges

Opinion by Flaum, Circuit Judge

US v. Harris, No. 08-4026

2009-10-30T14:09:00Z

Conviction of defendant for possession of cocaine with intent to distribute is affirmed where: 1) the district court did not abuse its discretion in admitting co-conspirator's hearsay statements; 2) district court did not err in admitting evidence seized during a traffic stop of the vehicle in which the defendant was riding based on probable cause; and 3) defendant's sufficiency of evidence challenge is without merit, as evidence presented by the government would enable a rational jury to find defendant guilty of the possession charge on which he seeks a judgment of acquittal.

Read US v. Harris, No. 08-4026

Appellate Information

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin

Decided October 30, 2009

Judges

Before: Flaum, Williams and Evans, Circuit Judges

Opinion by Flaum, Circuit Judge

Schering-Plough Healthcare Prod., Inc. , No. 09-1438

2009-10-29T21:34:58Z

In plaintiff's section 43(a)(1)(B) of the Lanham Act suit against defendants involving oral laxative drug and over-the-counter versions of the drug manufactured by defendants, district court's dismissal of plaintiff's complaint without prejudice is affirmed as the FDA is conducting a proceeding to determine whether defendants' drugs are misbranded now that there is an over-the-counter version of the drug.

Read Schering-Plough Healthcare Prod., Inc. , No. 09-1438

Appellate Information

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin

Decided October 29, 2009

Judges

Before: Posner, Flaum, and Rovner, Circuit Judges

Opinion by Posner, Circuit Judge

Lewitton v. ITA Software, Inc., No. 08-3725

2009-10-28T21:48:39Z

In plaintiff's breach of employment contract case against his former employer over stock option purchase dispute, district court's grant of summary judgment in favor of plaintiff is affirmed as the employment contract unambiguously allows plaintiff to exercise all of the shares he accumulated during his 25-month tenure with the company, and as such, he is entitled to exercise option to purchase 138,900 shares of the company stock, not 34,722 shares.

Read Lewitton v. ITA Software, Inc., No. 08-3725

Appellate Information

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division

Decided October 28, 2009

Judges

Before: Bauer, Kanne, and Evans, Circuit Judges

Opinion by Evans, Circuit Judge

James River Ins. Co. v. Kemper Cas. Ins. Co., No. 08-3570

2009-10-28T21:45:35Z

In plaintiff-James River Insurance's case seeking a declaration that it had no duty to defend or indemnify two lawyers who were sued for malpractice, district court's grant of summary judgment in favor of defendant-Kemper Insurance is reversed with instructions to enter the declaratory judgment requested by the plaintiff as James River's policy does not apply since it excludes coverage of conduct covered by a prior insurer, and all the wrongful acts alleged in the malpractice suit arose from events that took place in Kemper's policy period.

Read James River Ins. Co. v. Kemper Cas. Ins. Co., No. 08-3570

Appellate Information

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division

Decided October 28, 2009

Judges

Before: Posner, Manion, and Tinder, Circuit Judges

Opinion by Posner, Circuit Judge

Sunstar, Inc. v. Alberto-Culver Co. , No. 07-3288

2009-10-28T21:42:46Z

In a trademark infringement case involving interpretation of a trademark licensing agreement of plaintiff's "VO5" trademark, and Japanese trademark law, district court's judgment in favor of the plaintiff, and orders enjoining the defendant from using the variant mark, and terminating the licensing agreement to return all the licensed trademarks to the plaintiff is vacated and remanded as under Japanese trademark law, the term senyoshioken, which the district judge refused to give the meaning of to the jury, means exclusive-use right where the license holder not only has an exclusive right to use the licensed trademarks within the geographical scope of the licensed trademarks but can sue infringers of the trademarks in its own name.

Read Sunstar, Inc. v. Alberto-Culver Co. , No. 07-3288

Appellate Information

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division

Decided October 28, 2009

Judges

Before: Posner, Manion, and Evans, Circuit Judges

Opinion by Posner, Circuit Judge

Butler v. Village of Round Lake Police Dep't, No. 08-3856

2009-10-27T23:23:12Z

In plaintiff-police officer's ADA claim against defendant-village, dismissal of his case on the ground of judicial estoppel is affirmed where: 1) to succeed on an ADA claim, a plaintiff must show that with or without reasonable accommodations, he can perform the essential functions of his job; and 2) here, accepting plaintiff's sworn testimony before the pension board as true, the court could not see how he could perform essential police functions with or without accommodations.

Read Butler v. Village of Round Lake Police Dep't, No. 08-3856

Appellate Information

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division

Decided October 27, 2009

Judges

Before: Posner, Manion, and Evans, Circuit Judges

Opinion by Evans, Circuit Judge

River of Life Kingdom Ministries v. Village of Hazel Crest, No. 08-2819

2009-10-27T23:20:32Z

In plaintiff-church's suit against defendant-village under the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act to allow it to relocate to the business district, district court's denial of plaintiff's motion for preliminary injunction to allow it to relocate to the property in the interim is affirmed as the church has only a slim chance of success on the merits and any irreparable harm it may suffer does not significantly outweigh the potential harm to the village.

Read River of Life Kingdom Ministries v. Village of Hazel Crest, No. 08-2819

Appellate Information

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division

Decided October 27, 2009

Judges

Before: Cudhay, Manion, and Williams, Circuit Judges

Opinion by Williams, Circuit Judge