Settling Devotional v. Copyright Royalty Board

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that administrative tribunal “reasonably declined to consider … methodological evidence given its untimely presenta- tion”
• “[A]ll that matters is that we cannot say that the [Board] lacked substantial evidence” in reaching its conclusions.
• “[A]ll that matters is that we cannot say that the [Board] lacked substantial evidence” in reaching its conclusions.
• not offering a family discount plan could lead to a family sharing an individual account at only $10 a month, rather than $15 a month
• The lack of record support for the Copyright Royalty Board’s approach was “ma[de] * * * worse” by the fact that the approach was “first presented in the * * * determination and not advanced by any participant.”
• The lack of record support for the Copyright Royalty Board’s approach was “ma[de] * * * worse” by the fact that the approach was “first presented in the * * * determination and not advanced by any participant.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).