U.S. Structures, Incorporated, a Foreign Corporation v. J.P. Structures, Incorporated, a Michigan Corporation, and Joseph J. Pilat

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that remand is appropriate where the district court “provides no elaboration and makes no finding that the hours expended were reasonable, or that the hourly rates were customary”
• finding that the district court “did not err in computing damages as an amount equal to four times actual damages,” but not addressing or requiring a showing of willfulness before a plaintiff is entitled to recover enhanced damages
• finding the district court’s reliance on a summary that lists the number of hours [plaintiffs’] attorneys worked on various stages of the case, the hourly rate charged for each attorney, and a total amount incurred was not appropriate
• “under 15 U.S.C. § 1117(a), attorneys’ fees are recoverable only for work performed in connection with claims filed under the Lanham Act”
• “With regard to the award of attorneys’ fees, the court found that defendants’ infringement was ‘willful, deliberate, and intentional.’ ”
• ʺ[U]nder 15 U.S.C. § 1117(a), attorneysʹ fees are recoverable only for work performed in connection with claims filed under the Lanham Act.ʺ

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).