Lin v. Holder, No. 06-73377, involved a petition for review of the BIA's denial of petitioner's application for asylum and requested withholding of removal under the Immigration and Nationality Act ("INA") and protection under the Convention Against Torture ("CAT"). The Ninth Circuit granted the petition in part, on the ground that petitioner established by clear and convincing evidence that he filed his asylum application within one year of arriving in the United States and that the case must be remanded to the BIA for consideration of his asylum claim on the merits. However, the court denied the petition in part, holding that the record did not compel the conclusion that the immigration judge erred in denying petitioner's request for withholding of removal.
Visa Int'l. Serv. Assn. v. JSL Corp., No. 08-15206, involved an action by Visa Corporation claiming that a company called eVisa was likely to dilute the Visa trademark. The court of appeals affirmed summary judgment for plaintiff, holding that introduction of the eVisa mark to the marketplace meant that there were now two products, and not just one, competing for association with that word, which was the quintessential harm addressed by anti-dilution law.