§
In re Kochlani

12 Cited authorities

  1. U.S. v. Torkington

    812 F.2d 1347 (11th Cir. 1987)   Cited 169 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Explaining that in Lanham Act cases the audience for the likelihood of confusion test "includes individuals who are potential purchasers of the trademark holder[']s goods as well as those who are potential direct purchasers of the allegedly counterfeit goods."

  2. U.S. v. Esparza-Ponce

    193 F.3d 1133 (9th Cir. 1999)   Cited 65 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that California theft constitutes a crime of moral turpitude

  3. Carty v. Ashcroft

    395 F.3d 1081 (9th Cir. 2005)   Cited 51 times
    Holding that a statute prohibiting conduct with "specific intent to evade a tax" did not contain, as an essential element of the offense: an intent to defraud

  4. U.S. v. Yamin

    868 F.2d 130 (5th Cir. 1989)   Cited 56 times
    Finding no clear error in jury instruction that the prosecution “is not required to prove that the defendant ever had an intent to deceive or defraud anyone”

  5. U.S. v. Foote

    413 F.3d 1240 (10th Cir. 2005)   Cited 30 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Holding that the district court erred in delegating the creation of a payment schedule to the probation office because "[w]hen a district court provides that a criminal fine be paid in installments, 18 U.S.C. § 3572 requires the court to specify the period of time over which the payments must be made"

  6. United States v. Nam Ping Hon

    904 F.2d 803 (2d Cir. 1990)   Cited 46 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Affirming conviction under 18 U.S.C. § 2320, which incorporates the confusion requirement in the civil Lanham Act, where judge instructed jury that they could find "likelihood of confusion" by someone merely viewing the watch

  7. U.S. v. Gantos

    817 F.2d 41 (8th Cir. 1987)   Cited 27 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Upholding a conviction where the defendant “told the undercover agent that the watches were copies”

  8. United States v. Baker

    807 F.2d 427 (5th Cir. 1986)   Cited 12 times   2 Legal Analyses

    No. 86-2233. Summary Calendar. December 24, 1986. Thomas S. Berg, Asst. Federal Public Defender, Roland E. Dahlin, II, Houston, Tex., for defendant-appellant. Henry K. Oncken, U.S. Atty., Susan L. Yarbrough, Asst. U.S. Atty., Appellate Div. James R. Gough, Asst. U.S. Atty., Houston, Tex., for plaintiff-appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas. Before REAVLEY, JOHNSON and DAVIS, Circuit Judges. REAVLEY, Circuit Judge: Paul Baker appeals his conviction

  9. Section 2 - Principals

    18 U.S.C. § 2   Cited 23,873 times   57 Legal Analyses
    Holding aiders and abettors punishable as principals under federal criminal law

  10. Section 1227 - Deportable aliens

    8 U.S.C. § 1227   Cited 7,910 times   40 Legal Analyses
    Granting this discretion to the Attorney General

  11. Section 2320 - Trafficking in counterfeit goods or services

    18 U.S.C. § 2320   Cited 432 times   11 Legal Analyses
    Referencing counterfeiting

  12. Section 1426 - Reproduction of naturalization or citizenship papers

    18 U.S.C. § 1426   Cited 44 times
    Relating to the reproduction of naturalization or citizenship papers