Mellen v. Trustees of Boston University

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• explaining that pending proceedings in the TTAB do not 27 divest the court with jurisdiction to decide claims involving the trademark
• noting that less than “concrete threats” are required to state a 6 || claim for relief for purposes of Rule 12(b)(1)
• finding the claimant’s performance of work that contradicted his 27 symptoms an insufficient reason to reject his testimony
• “service of process is the means by which a court asserts its jurisdiction over the person”
• “Faretta does not articulate a specific time frame pursuant to which a 28 claim for self-representation qualifies as timely. It indicates only that a motion for self- 1 representation made ‘weeks before trial’ is timely.”
• “The terms ‘frivolous’, ‘unreasonable’ and ‘without foundation’ as used 27 1 A more complete summary of the allegations of plaintiff’s FAC is contained in the court’s 28 February 19, 2025 order. (See Doc. No. 30 at 2–4.

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).