Clemente Properties, Inc., et al. v. Pedro R. Pierluisi-Urrutia, et al.

Puerto Rico took the trademark of baseball legend Roberto Clemente to generate roughly 15 million dollars in revenue. The Fifth Amendment protects property “without any distinction between different types.” Horne v. Department of Agriculture, 576 U.S. 350, 358 (2015). But the First Circuit refused to apply per se principles that would ordinarily apply to an appropriation of a property right—all because the Clementes are seeking redress for a taking of their intangible property rights. The First Circuit endowed Puerto Rico with the sovereign immunity of the States and held that the Lanham Act did not properly abrogate that immunity—even though “it is difficult to see how the same inherent sovereign immunity that the States enjoy in federal court would apply to Puerto Rico.” Fin. Oversight & Mgmt. Bd. for Puerto Rico v. Centro de Periodismo Investigativo, Inc., 598 U.S. 339, 354 (2023) (Thomas, J., dissenting). The questions presented are:

1. W hether the Fi f th A mendment exempt s intangible property from the per se rules that govern takings of tangible property.

2. Whether Puerto Rico enjoys any form of immunity from suit in federal court and, if so, whether the Lanham Act abrogates that immunity.