Stuart Waterstone Forum Index Stuart Waterstone

 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

To: Pierce College Monday Students

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Stuart Waterstone Forum Index -> Questions
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Waterstone
Site Admin


Joined: 31 Jan 2005
Posts: 171

PostPosted: Tue Sep 19, 2017 10:19 am    Post subject: To: Pierce College Monday Students Reply with quote

The model answers that I should have distributed yesterday:

Bonito:

ISSUE: HERE’S THE ANSWERS THAT A FORMER STUDENT SUBMITTED:


ISSUE: Is the Florida Statute Valid

RULE: The U.S. Constitution’s Supremacy Clause states that any laws passed Congress supersede any laws passed by any individual state. And any state law that contradicts (e.g. adds to, detracts from, changes, or is in conflict with) the laws passed by Congress under the Supremacy Clause will be declared Unconstitutional or invalid.

ANALYSIS: In response to the claim filed in the Florida Supreme Court, it is in my opinion that the Florida statute is in violation of the Federal Patent Law.

Bonito failed to file a patent application thereby giving Thunder Craft the right under the law of free competition, to continue to sell their products. The Bonito 5VBR had been freely exposed to the public for well over six years without a patent, therefore making it public knowledge. Had the Bonito Company filed a patent under federal law, then, Thunder Craft could be held responsible for infringement.

Florida law clearly conflicts with federal guidelines in regards to the patent laws. Whenever a state law is in direct conflict with federal law, federal law will always prevail. The Florida statute is preempted by the Supremacy Clause, and should therefore be recognized as being in direct conflict with federal law. The Patent clause is supposed to reflect a balance to promote the need for innovation and the avoidance of monopolies that stifle competition. In the case of Bonito, had a federal patent application been filed and had they followed federal guidelines, this situation would have rendered Thunder Boats in violation.

CONCLUSION: The Florida law is Invalid and Unconstitutional.



As stated in class: your answers must use this format headings:

RULE
ISSUE
REASONING
CONCLUSION

AND:

At a bare minimum: I would have expected to see: The Florida Law is unconstitutional. The Supremacy Clause tells us that any law which is in direct conflict with federal laws will be declared invalid. The Florida Law gives protection to a company (Bonito) that ignored the mandate of a congressional act. Bonito cannot claim protection from an unconstitutional law.

Badseed:

Issue: Will Badseed’s defense work in Court?

Rule: The Supremacy Clause: Federal Law will always supersede any state law.

Analysis: Congress is the entity that writes federal laws. Congress has made it illegal to grow and distribute any non-prescription medications/drugs which are classified as being hallucinogenic, including Oxycodone. Badseed’s actions are in exact contradiction to Congresses’ Section 298333. Badseed uses as a defense Washington’s Assembly Bill Number 44443, which allows him to ignore Section 29833. However, Federal Law supersedes Washington’s Statue.

Conclusion: The Court will declare Washington’s Statue Unconstitutional as it violates the Supremacy Clause.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Stuart Waterstone Forum Index -> Questions All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group