·
Case and law context
Interpretation-only case: no CASE context or instance blocks recorded in this snapshot.
Instances and excluded annotation blocks
| Case | Element | Holding and scope | Variant | Exact source quotations |
|---|
Court interpretations recorded from this case
interpretation
Concluding, for the foregoing reasons, that the sovereign immunity of the State of Florida was neither validly abrogated by the Trademark Remedy Clarification Act, nor voluntarily waived by the State’s activities in interstate commerce, we hold that the federal courts are without jurisdiction to entertain this suit against an arm of the State of Florida. The judgment of the Third Circuit dismissing the action is affirmed.
Concluding, for the foregoing reasons, that the sovereign immunity of the State of Florida was neither validly abrogated by the Trademark Remedy Clarification Act, nor voluntarily waived by the State’s activities in interstate commerce, we hold that the federal courts are without jurisdiction to entertain this suit against an arm of the State of Florida. The judgment of the Third Circuit dismissing the action is affirmed.Source:
docroot/ir/caselaw/us_527.jsonl#/us/527/0666-01; Unicode character offsets [40395:40820] (end exclusive); SHA-256 8b0b1a46e971ac7d0b9bea1a9800066014164394d532fb45276d6f8eb393dffa.Judicial constitutional limit, not a statutory exemption from (a)(2). Do not equate every local government or official with an immune state, or assume statutory coverage alone authorizes the requested remedy. College Savings Bank concerned misrepresentations of the state's own product; do not turn its fact-specific abrogation reasoning into a complete rule for all intellectual-property suits.