Case Law Index Animal Identification
July 7, 1975 – June 11, 2024
This index provides a comprehensive though not necessarily exhaustive compilation of reported and unreported federal and state court decisions involving Animal Identification that were decided between the dates listed above. The cases are listed in reverse chronological order. The “Text” link goes to the freely available Google Scholar text of the opinion. These listings are for educational purposes only and are not a substitute for legal counsel.
FIFTH CIRCUIT
Avid Identification Systems, Inc. v. Phillips Electronics North America Corp., 2007 WL 2901415 (E.D. Tex. 2007) (patent on RFID technology) (Not Reported in F.Supp.2d)
John Doe #1 v. Veneman, 380 F.3d 807 (Release of identifying information under FOIA) Text
SIXTH CIRCUIT
Hodgins v U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, 238 F.3d 421 (Table), 2000 WL 1785733 (Violation of APHIS standards) (Unpublished Disposition)
EIGHTH CIRCUIT
Nebraska Beef Producers Committee v. Nebraska Brand Committee, 287 F.Supp.3d 740 (D. Neb. 2018) (constitutionality of state branding law) Text
Crystal Imp. Corp. v. AVID Identification Sys., Inc., 582 F.Supp.2d 1166 (D. Minn. 2008) (trademark infringing on RFID technology) Text
Crystal Import Corp. v. Avid Identification Sys., Inc., 2008 WL 2120998 (D. Minn. 2008) (patent on RFID technology)
Alien Tech. Corp. v. Intermec, Inc., 2008 WL 504527 (D. N.D. 2008) (patent on RFID technology)
Black Hills Packing Co. v. S. D. Stockgrowers Ass’n, 397 F.Supp. 622 (D. S.D. 1975) (delegation of authority under branding statute) Text
NINTH CIRCUIT
In re Wallace, No. 11-21077-TLM, 2011 WL 5827623 (Bankr. D. Idaho Nov. 18, 2011) (ownership of bolus identification patent) Text
In re Wallace, No. 09-20496-TLM, 2011 WL 1230535 (D. Idaho 2011) (ownership of bolus identification patent) Text
In re Wallace, No. 09-20496-TLM, 2010 WL 378351 (Bankr. D. Idaho Jan. 26, 2010) (ownership of bolus identification patent) Text
Allflex USA, Inc. v. Avid Identification Sys., Inc., 2007 WL 2701331 (C.D. Cal. 2007) (patent on RFID technology) (Not Reported in F.Supp.2d)
Ranchers Cattlemen Action Legal Fund United Stockgrowers of Am. v. US Dep’t of Ag, 499 F.3d 1108 (C.D. Cal. 2007) (challenge under the Animal Health Protection Act) Text
Trovan, Ltd. v. Pfizer, Inc., 2000 WL 709149 (C.D. Cal. 2000) (patent infringement on transponders) (Not Reported in F.Supp.2d)
TENTH CIRCUIT
Ranchers Cattlemen Action Leg. Fund United Stockgrowers of Am. V. U.S. Dept. of Agric., 19-CV-205-NDF, 2020 WL 10356243 (D. Wyo. Feb. 13, 2020) (petitioner’s claim alleging DOA-APHIS factsheet unlawfully mandated identification requirements dismissed for mootness and lack of jurisdiction) Text
Stanko v. Maher, 419 F.3d 1107 (10th Cir. 2005) (constitutionality of state brand inspector’s powers) Text
Estate of Harris v. Harris, 218 F.3d 1140 (10th Cir. 2005) (brand is prima facie evidence of ownership) Text
D.C. CIRCUIT
Humane Society of the United States v. Animal and Plant Health Inspection Services, 386 F. Supp.3d 34 (D.D.C. 2019) (APHIS inspection report exemptions from FOIA requests) Text
Mynette Technologies, Inc. v. U.S., 139 Fed.Cl. 336 (2018) (patent infringement on radio-frequency identification) Text
Avid Identification Sys., Inc. v. Crystal Import Corp., 603 F.3d 967 (Fed. Cl. 2010) (patent infringement on radio-frequency identification) Text
Farm-To-Consumer Legal Defense Fund v. Vilsack, 636 F.Supp.2d 116 (D.D.C. 2009) (challenge to state animal identification system) Text
Zanoni v. U.S. Dep’t of Agric., 605 F.Supp.2d 230 (D. D.C. 2009) (NAIS system exempt from FOIA requests) Text
ALASKA
Jerrel v. State, Dept. of Natural Resources, 999 P.2d 138 (Alaska 2000) (failure to clearly mark livestock) Text
ARIZONA
Stambaugh v. Killian, 398 P.3d 574 (Ariz. 2017) (state statute prevents adopting or recording of identical brands) Text
FLORIDA
State v. Carrier, 240 So.3d 852 (Fla. 2nd DCA 2018) (state statute prevents knowingly altering animal health documents) Text
NEBRASKA
Heritage Bank v. Kasson, 853 N.W.2d 868 (Neb. Ct. App. 2014) (brand is prima facie evidence of ownership and may be rebutted) Text
NORTH DAKOTA
Billey v. N.D. Stockmen’s Ass’n, 579 N.W.2d 171 (N.D. 1998) (constitutionality of state branding law) Text
SOUTH DAKOTA
Cont’l Grain Co. v. Brandenburg, 587 N.W.2d 196 (S.D. 1998) (branding law does not supersede the UCC) Text
WISCONSIN
Wisconsin v. Miller, No. 08-CX-5 (Wis. Cir. Ct. Mar. 9, 2010) (religious exemption to animal ID program) Text