You are here

2L-3L Upper Level Lesson Topics


This lesson deals with how trademark protection may be lost by abandonment, i.e. the discontinued use of a mark, the licensing of a mark in gross or an assignment of a mark in gross. This lesson is intended to be used as a supplement to the student's course material. It analyzes several issues that arise from the non-use or limited use of a mark, the licensing or assignment of a mark, as well as the considerations that follow the resumption of use of an abandoned mark.


This lesson can be used in a Constitutional Law or Family Law course, as preparation for class or as review for an exam on the topic of Abortion.

Acquired Secondary Meaning

This lesson builds on the concepts that you may have been introduced to in Professor Robert Lind's lesson on the classification of marks, e.g., generic marks, descriptive marks, suggestive marks, arbitrary marks, and fanciful marks. Specifically, this lesson will concentrate on the validity of a mark for trademark protection purposes when the trademark or trade dress is not inherently distinctive.

Activities Regulated Under Section 404

This lesson was written as a review of the material covered in Chapter 5 of the CALI e-book, Wetlands Law: A Course Source. The lesson reviews whether activities such as landclearing, ditching, draining, sidecasting, and deep ripping are regulated as "discharges" of dredged or fill material, and reviews the relationship between the Clean Water Act section 402 permit program and the Section 404 wetlands permit program.

Adjudicative Rules

The purpose of this lesson is to examine how administrative agencies create "rules," particularly in adjudicative contexts. The goal is to contrast so-called "legislative procedures" with "adjudicative procedures," and then to examine the scope and limits of adjudicative authority. The lesson is intended for students who have studied these issues in class and wish to refine their knowledge.

Adjustments for Present Value and Future Inflation

The concept of "present value" is derived from the fact that any given sum of money has the capacity (if properly invested) to earn additional money over time. Indeed, it is this inherent earning power of money that gives rise to the requirement in most jurisdictions that "present value" adjustments must be made in every situation where damages representing future pecuniary losses are awarded. Part I of this lesson is designed to explain why certain types of damage awards must be adjusted to their "present value," and to demonstrate precisely how those adjustments are actually calculated. The lesson also examines a variety of individual factors that should be taken into consideration in performing various types of "present value" adjustments. This lesson is intended for those students who already have a good working knowledge of the concept of pecuniary damages, including the various individual components of such damages, as well as how they are measured.

Part II of this lesson addresses the related concept of adjusting future pecuniary damage awards to account for the potential effects of future economic inflation. This portion of the lesson examines in detail three specific methodologies for making such adjustments that were expressly articulated by the U.S. Supreme Court in its decision in Jones & Laughlin Steel Corp. v. Pfeifer, 462 U.S. 523, 76 L. Ed. 2d 768, 103 S. Ct. 2541 (1983).

Administrative Inspections

This lesson deals with the topic of administrative inspections. Governmental officials conduct inspections in a variety of contexts. Some of these inspections are conducted by the police. Others are conducted by special administrative officials charged only with the task of carrying out certain administrative tasks. As we shall see, the United States Supreme Court has developed special rules governing such inspections. In this lesson, we examine those special rules in depth.