Comité Fiestas De La Calle San Sebastián, Inc. v. Soto
925 F.3d 528
| 1st Cir. | 2019Background
- Comité Fiestas de la Calle San Sebastián, Inc. is a nonprofit that helps run the annual Fiestas de la Calle San Sebastián in Old San Juan and claims to be successor to an earlier organizing group.
- In 2014 the Comité criticized Mayor Carmen Yulín Cruz for de-emphasizing religious/traditional aspects of the festival; Comité alleges subsequent adverse treatment by the municipality.
- Alleged adverse acts included a downgraded vendor contract, stricter permitting/certification requirements (not applied to other vendors), and loss of a prime entertainment timeslot to a donor supportive of the Mayor.
- The Comité sued for First Amendment political discrimination, retaliation, and religious discrimination, and for trademark infringement of the festival name; the district court granted summary judgment for Mayor Cruz and the municipality and denied the Comité’s Rule 59(e) motion.
- On appeal the panel considered whether the notice of appeal (which referenced only the Rule 59(e) denial) preserved challenges to the underlying summary judgment and then addressed the preserved claims on the merits.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the Court has jurisdiction to review summary judgment when notice appeals only denial of Rule 59(e) | Comité argued its Rule 59(e) motion rehashed summary-judgment arguments so the appeal should encompass the underlying order | Defendants argued the notice limited the appeal to the Rule 59(e) order, stripping appellate jurisdiction over the summary judgment | Court treated notice liberally because the Rule 59(e) motion largely reasserted the same issues; appeal permitted as to overlapping issues (political discrimination and trademark) |
| Political-discrimination claim (First Amendment) — whether evidence shows decisionmakers knew Comité’s political stance | Comité: municipal favors to other vendors and contractors who supported the Mayor show political discrimination against Comité for criticizing the Mayor | Defendants: no evidence decisionmakers knew Comité’s or members’ political affiliation; contractor donations occurred at unknown times and do not show knowledge | Court: affirmed summary judgment for defendants — record lacks evidence that decisionmakers knew Comité’s political views or used them as a basis for adverse action |
| Trademark claim — whether "Fiestas de la Calle San Sebastián" has protectable secondary meaning | Comité: the name identifies the Comité’s festival and PTO preliminary action supports mark | Defendants: no evidence the phrase has acquired secondary meaning associating the public with a single commercial source | Court: affirmed summary judgment — plaintiff failed to show secondary meaning or public association with a single source; PTO preliminary action was not pressed on appeal and related arguments waived |
| Claim preservation and waiver (procedural) | Comité sought to rely on new PTO evidence in Rule 59(e) and on various claims on appeal | Defendants: argued procedural defects and waiver for claims not raised on reconsideration or not briefed on appeal | Court: declined to consider claims not preserved (retaliation claim and PTO argument were waived) |
Key Cases Cited
- Smith v. Barry, 502 U.S. 244 (jurisdictional strictures of Rule 3 are prerequisite to appellate review)
- Díaz Aviation Corp. v. Airport Aviation Servs., Inc., 716 F.3d 256 (1st Cir.) (Rule 3 relief when reconsideration motion rehashes earlier arguments)
- Biltcliffe v. CitiMortgage, Inc., 772 F.3d 925 (1st Cir.) (limitations on appellate review when reconsideration advances new arguments)
- Barry v. Moran, 661 F.3d 696 (1st Cir.) (political-affiliation discrimination requires evidence decisionmakers knew plaintiff’s affiliation)
- Bos. Beer Co. v. Slesar Bros. Brewing Co., 9 F.3d 175 (1st Cir.) (descriptive marks require secondary meaning for protection)
- Bos. Duck Tours, LP v. Super Duck Tours, LLC, 531 F.3d 1 (1st Cir.) (secondary meaning requires public association with a single commercial source)
- Foman v. Davis, 371 U.S. 178 (1962) (federal courts should avoid decisions based on mere technicalities)