Kimberly Bailey will present “The Aftermath of Crawford and Davis: Deconstructing the Sound of Silence” as a work-in-progress at the Joint Conference of the Western Teachers of Color and Conference of Asian Pacific American Law Faculty in Denver, Colorado on April 25, 2008.
Matthew Bernstein spoke at the Midwest Regional Conference of the American Immigration Lawyers Association on the topic, “Death, Separation and Divorce: Changes in Family Relationships” on April 14, 2008.
William Birdthistle spoke on exchange-traded funds at Boston College Law School in March 2008 and at the University of Illinois College of Law in February 2008.
Daniel Coyne was an invited participant at the Disproportionate Minority Confinement Conference in Oak Brook, Illinois in December 2008 and at a Bond Court Reform planning session organized and conducted by Circuit Court of Cook County Chief Judge Timothy Evans in January 2008.
Also in January, Professor Coyne was sworn into the United States Supreme Court on motion during open session in Washington, DC, testified before Cook County Board Commissioners for the Budget Committee for the Criminal Justice System in opposition to projected budget cuts, and was interviewed extensively by Chicago Daily Law Bulletin, Chicago Tribune, Chicago Sun-Times and NPR/WBEZ regarding judicial campaign ethics.
In February 2008, he participated in a press conference with State’s Attorney Richard Devine, Cook County Commissioner John Daley, Public Defender Edwin Burnette and Sheriff Tom Dart regarding projected budget cuts to the criminal justice system and the adverse effect such cuts would have on the system.
He organized and conducted an all day CLE program in conjunction with the Office of the Attorney General regarding the Sexually Violent Persons Commitment Act. The program was hosted by Chicago-Kent in late February 2008.
Professor Coyne participated as a scoring judge in the annual American Association for Justice Trial Advocacy Competition held at the Richard J. Daley Center in March 2008. He represented the Chicago Council of Lawyers at a planning meeting with Deputy Superintendent of Police regarding the newly formed Bureau of Professional Standards in April 2008.
Graeme Dinwoodie has been selected by the International Trademark Association as the recipient of the 2008 Pattishall Medal for Teaching Excellence of Trademark and Trade Identity Subjects. The award will be presented at a gala dinner at the Annual Meeting of the International Trademark Association in Berlin in May 2008.
In April, Professor Dinwoodie’s article, Confusion Over Use: Contextualism in Trademark Law, 92 Iowa L. Rev. 1597 (2007) (with Mark Janis), was selected to receive the 2008 Ladas Award for Best Article on Trademark Law. The award is given by the International Trademark Association.
Professor Dinwoodie was elected as the Chair of the Section on Intellectual Property Law of the Association of American Law Schools for 2008-09. He has also continued to participate in several meetings of the Max Planck Group on Conflicts of Laws in Intellectual Property (CLIP), which is drafting an instrument on Conflicts and Intellectual Property Law.
In March 2008, he made two presentations (one on “Recent Developments in U.S. Dilution Law” and the other on “Key Concepts: Exceptions and Limitations”) to a conference on Trade Mark Dilution: Putting an End to (All the) Confusion held at the University of Cambridge. He also delivered a public lecture on “Trademark Law and New Uses of Trademarks” at the University of London, Queen Mary College.
Professor Dinwoodie spoke on “Protection of Product Design Under U.S. Intellectual Property Law” at the Annual Meeting of the Board of the IPR University Center and made a presentation on “How Well-Known Marks are Treated in the United States” at a seminar on Current Developments in Trademark Law in Helsinki in March 2008.
In April 2008, he spoke on “Extraterritoriality of Intellectual Property Laws: An American View” at a conference on Intellectual Property and Private International Law at the University of Bayreuth, Germany.
He also served as the 2008 Distinguished Intellectual Property Law Visitor at Lewis and Clark Law School, during which he delivered a public lecture on “Developing Defenses in Trademark Law” as well as met with students, faculty, and trademark practitioners. Also in April, Professor Dinwoodie participated in the Trademark Scholars’ Roundtable at the University of Iowa College of Law.
In May 2008, Professor Dinwoodie will deliver the Third Annual Intellectual Property Lecture at Emmanuel College, University of Cambridge on “Ensuring Consumers ‘Get What They Want’: The Role of Trademark Law.”
Professor Dinwoodie’s Winter 2007-2008 activities also included a lecture on “The Limits of Trademark Law: Proscriptive Principles and Permissive Principles” in Munich as part of the Lecture Circle organized by the Max Planck Institute for Intellectual Property, Tax and Competition Law; “Recent Developments in U.S. Trademark Law” at a seminar on From Mark to Brand at the IPR University Center in Helsinki; and participating in a meeting of copyright experts at Cardozo Law School organized by Professors Ruth Okediji and Bernt Hugenholtz and the Open Society Institute to assist the professors in the preparation of their study on Conceiving an International Instrument on Exceptions and Limitations to Copyright.
Richard Gonzalez has been chosen to receive an “Excellence in Public Interest Service” award from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois. A ceremony will be held before the entire Northern District federal court judiciary on May 13, 2008.
Sarah Harding participated in the Comparative Constitutional Law Roundtable at George Washington University in March 2008. In April she presented “Cultural Property: Culture or Property?” at the University of Wisconsin School of Law.
Edward Harris and Douglas Godfrey will be presenters at the Teaching Drafting and Transactional Skills: The Basics and Beyond conference to be held at Emory Law School on May 30-31, 2008. Their topic is “Due Diligence and Drafting: How Investigation is Reflected in Contractual Language.”
Steven Heyman took part in a Federalist Society debate over the meaning of the Second Amendment right to bear arms on April 23, 2008 at Chicago-Kent. His debate opponent was Robert A. Levy, a senior fellow at the Cato Institute, who represented the plaintiffs in District of Columbia v. Heller, the Second Amendment case that is now awaiting decision by the Supreme Court.
Timothy Holbrook will present “Claim Construction Update: What’s the Latest Trend?” at a Minnesota State Bar Association Continuing Legal Education program in Minneapolis on May 2, 2008.
He served as a panelist for “The Pendulum Swings Back: The Impact of Recent SCOTUS and Federal Circuit Cases” at the Northwestern Journal of Technology and Intellectual Property 3rd Annual Symposium at Northwestern University School of Law on April 18, 2008.
Professor Holbrook was the Moderator for “What Patent Law Reform Really Means for You” at the 23rd Annual Intellectual Property Conference sponsored by the American Bar Association Section of Intellectual Property and held in Arlington, Virginia on April 10, 2008.
He was a Conference Fellow at “A Symposium on Patent Failure: How Judges, Bureaucrats, and Lawyers Put Innovators at Risk” at University of Georgia School of Law in Athens in March 2008.
Edward Kraus successfully argued before the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals in Costello v. Astrue, 499 F.3d 648 (7th Cir. 2007). The Seventh Circuit reversed the Administrative Law Judge’s decision (which had been upheld by the District Court) and found that Costello, an elderly woman applying for Social Security widowers benefits, satisfied the criteria for a deemed application filing date under 42 U.S.C. s402(j)(5)of the Social Security Act. On remand, the District Court directed the Social Security Administration to pay Costello past-due benefits and granted attorney fees under the Equal Access to Justice Act.
Professor Kraus spoke at the Diabetes: Solutions For the 21st Century conference held on April 18, 2008 at Chicago-Kent. His presentation was entitled “Disability, Diabetes and the Law.”
Martin Malin will speak on “Register-Guard and the Three I’s: Ironic, Incoherent and Irrelevant,” at the ABA Section on Labor & Employment Law, Committee on Technology Midyear Meeting on May 2, 2008.
He will speak on “Class Action Waivers in Arbitration Agreements” at the National Academy of Arbitrators Annual Meeting in Ottawa, Canada on May 22, 2008.
“Labor Law in Cyberspace” will be Professor Malin’s topic at the Association of Labor Relations Agencies Annual Conference in Burlington, Vermont on July 21, 2008. At that meeting he will also be a commentator for a presentation by Canadian Auto Workers President Buz Hardgrove on the CAW agreement with Magna International.
Nancy Marder presented “The Conundrum of Cameras in the Courtroom” as part of a panel on “Visual Media and the Law” at the Law, Culture & Humanities Conference at Boalt Hall, in Berkeley in March 2008.
She presented a paper, “Bringing Jury Instructions into the Twenty-First Century” at a conference entitled Writing to Win: Plain Language Jury Instructions held at Washburn University School of Law in Topeka, Kansas on April 8, 2008. At the same conference, she was a panelist on a panel entitled “Innovations in Timing, Structure, and Delivery of Jury Instructions” and on another panel entitled “The Judicial Process of Revising Jury Instructions for Comprehensibility.” The following day, she was also on the panel entitled “What Law Schools Can Do: Incorporating Jury Instructions and Jury Deliberations in the Law School Curriculum.”
Professor Marder presented her paper “Bringing Jury Instructions into the Twenty-First Century” at a symposium on The Modern American Jury held at Northern Illinois University Law School in DeKalb, Illinois on April 9, 2008.
Professor Marder, who is also the Reporter for the Illinois Supreme Court Committee on Jury Instructions in Civil Cases, attended the National Conference on Pattern Jury Instructions in Columbus, Ohio, which was organized by the National Center for State Courts, the Ohio Supreme Court, and the Ohio Judicial Center. Professor Marder was a panelist, along with three state court judges, on a panel entitled “Difficult Issues and Concepts in Pattern Jury Instructions” on April 17, 2008.
Kent Streseman spoke on persuasive appellate brief writing at the DuPage County Bar Association’s Appellate Law Seminar in March 2008. Professor Streseman also spoke on language and advocacy at a Chicago Bar Association seminar on the use of language at trial.
In January 2008, Professor Streseman accompanied a Chicago-Kent team to New York City for the National Moot Court Competition and watched the team bring home the national championship. In a single weekend in March 2008, Chicago-Kent teams won the Evan A. Evans Constitutional Law Moot Court Competition and finished second in the Herbert Wechsler National Criminal Law Moot Court Competition.
During Law Week in March 2008, Professor Streseman was honored by the Student Bar Association as Chicago-Kent’s Faculty Member of the Year.
Dan Tarlock spoke on “The Fear Factor in International Water Allocation: Can Law Mitigate It?,” at the Hamline Law Review Symposium, Water, Catalyst of Life and Strife: A Threat to Security or a Vital Opportunity to Foster Cooperation? in St. Paul, Minnesota on April 4, 2008. Symposium articles will be published in a forthcoming issue of the law review.
“Water and Western Growth” was Professor Tarlock’s topic at the Environmental Law and Policy Annual Review Conference in Washington, DC on April 11, 2008. Vanderbilt University Law School and Environmental Law Institute co-sponsored the conference, which is an invitation-only symposium of authors selected to have earlier articles updated and condensed for a new journal, Vanderbilt Journal of Environmental Law and Policy.
In New Jersey v. Delaware, No. 134, Orig. (March 31, 2008), the U.S. Supreme Court substantially adopted the analysis that Professor Tarlock developed for Delaware in a response to New Jersey’s motion to prevent appointment of a Special Master. The opinion upheld Delaware ‘s right to veto a proposed liquefied natural gas terminal in the bed of the Delaware River owned by Delaware. Justices Scalia and Alito dissented.