WILES v. STATE OF FLORIDA

How courts have described this case

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

• first citing Marx v. Gen. Revenue Corp., 568 U.S. 371, 386 (2013); and then citing Corley v. United States, 556 U.S. 303, 314 (2009)
• “Because there are competing die- tionary definitions of the term ‘slip-on’— and many of those definitions are not limited to shoes — the Trade Gourt correctly declined to limit the term ‘footwear of the slip-on type’ to shoes.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).