Read all the three mini-cases in the next section carefully. Each case has only one issue, and only one defined term applies to this assignment. After identifying the issue, analyze the applicable defined term to the facts of the mini-case using the IRAC format. Using the defined term’s elements, explain why the term applies to the specific facts, analyze the facts, and determine the outcome. Support all responses with primary legal authoritative citations. While other terms may also apply under the facts, only one term supports the motion or action detailed in the facts and is the main focus in this mini-case assignment. Do not analyze any other questions associated with the case studies.
XYA Corporation discovered that ZZZ Inc., a competitor, is producing a new widget gadget. XYA believed that the widget gadget contained parts owned by XYA under their patent. XYA filed a lawsuit in federal court asking for an expedited review to determine whether the court will grant an injunction against ZZZ to stop the imminent escalation of production. As a part of the preliminary hearing in federal court, XYA asked the court to allow it to obtain a copy of the official gadget blueprint specifications to determine if the case should continue. Under what procedure would XYA be permitted to receive the plans?
Suzy Que resides in North Carolina, a state that supplies most vape chemicals used in the new smoking pipes. Suzy sued the company VapAttack Inc., which manufactures and supplies Vape chemicals. Suzy sued VapAttack Inc. in federal court in the county in which she resides. Suzy lives in the same county where the majority of tobacco growers and cigarette manufacturers are located. VapAttack Inc. filed a motion with the federal court for a change of venue, asking the court to change the location of the lawsuit to the county where its headquarters resides. What grounds are available to VapAttack Inc., that support a motion for a change of venue by a defendant to the company’s business location? Name and describe the motion(s) available to defendant VapAttack Inc. Discuss the potential grounds for removal the court would review in deciding the motion?
Jake Salesman is a sales manager at Wegotit, Inc. The company’s SVP provided Jake and other team leaders with a copy of the company’s new sales forecast for the fourth quarter. The SVP distributed information related to the third-quarter results to the team leaders. The company’s performance was well below the profitable goals set by the president of the company. If the target goals are achieved, it will keep the company liquid for the rest of the year. As a result of the third quarter’s low performance, the company now faces massive layoffs unless the sales team doubles its efforts by the end of the fourth quarter. The SVP interpreted the President of the company’s message as meaning they had to do everything possible to regain the market share. The SVP indicated to the team leaders that they were personally responsible for the survival of the company. The highlight of his presentation came when he told everyone in the room that they were to recover the market share “by any means necessary.” The President said they should leave no stone unturned and let no rule stand in their way. Jake set up a meeting with his team to go over the individual quotas for which his members were responsible. Before the meeting with the SVP ended, the SVP indicated that he wanted every team leader to repeat his call to duty to reach the goals. If Jake Salesman follows the SVP’s directives, what else should Jake consider discussing with his team during this meeting, and why? What legal issues could potentially create a problem if the team took the phrase “by any means necessary,” literally?