Supreme Court of the United States · Official docket →
Nicholas D. Scoyni v. Daniel R. Salvador, et al.
Paid petition · United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, No. 20-35123 · judgment October 28, 2021
Before the decision, well below the 4.1% base rate, with no standout signals pointing toward a grant.
Questions presented
-
Does the district court have the right to adjudicate an intellectual property case without addressing parties’ pleas, disregarding legal precedence of intellectual property law as to ownership, or type of mark mentioned in original complaint relief, or use in commerce to specifically, a Servicemark, not a Trademark as district judge assumed?
-
Did the district court violate this petitioner’s constitutional rights by cancellation of petitioners registrations at state, and federal levels of service marks, and trademarks without proper due process of law, or takings clause consideration, and then redistribution of same property to defendants with unproven use and ownership rights of same defendants service business?
-
Does the district court have the right to deny a 28 U.S.C. § 144 motion to recuse the district judge without due cause, when the statute statement is that “each party has a right to one such action”?
-
Can the district court ignore a FRCP rule 55 (a) that was stamped received by the court prior to reply of defendants, and even without vacating the default request to clerk affidavit to enter default was received deny that default?
Counsel of record
For petitioner
Nicholas D. Scoyni
For respondent
—
Case
Conference history
Distributed for 1 conference
Proceedings
- Jun 06 2022Petition DENIED.
- May 17 2022DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 6/2/2022.
- Jan 05 2022Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due April 28, 2022)