business law

Follow the instructions carefully

24 hours only or a refund (do it perfectly from the first time, I don’t have any enough time to revise it )

1. Go online and find information on the World Trade Organization about https://www.wto.org/english/thewto_e/countries_e/oman_e.htm and write two sentence about what you found interesting. Attach the web page ( a screenshot of the page). 

2. At the end of chapter 6 under “Chapter Review” Business Scenarios and Case Problems is Case Problem 6-7. Answer the question in 4 – 5  sentences. The question is below. 

• 6-7.Criminal Procedures. Federal officers obtained a warrant to arrest Kateena Norman on charges of credit-card fraud and identity theft. Evidence of the crime included videos, photos, and a fingerprint on a fraudulent check. A previous search of Norman’s house had uncovered credit cards, new merchandise, and identifying information for other persons. An Internet account registered to the address had been used to apply for fraudulent credit cards, and a fraudulently obtained rental car was parked on the property. As the officers arrested Norman outside her house, they saw another woman and a caged pit bull inside. They further believed that Norman’s boyfriend, who had a criminal record and was also suspected of identify theft, could be there. In less than a minute, the officers searched only those areas within the house in which a person could hide.

•  Would it be reasonable to admit evidence revealed in this “protective sweep” during Norman’s trial on the arrest charges? Discuss. [United States v. Norman, 637 Fed.Appx. 934 (11th Cir. 2016)] (See Criminal Procedures.)

3. Write a paragraph about something that you wanted to find more information State what you found and write the new information.  This is NEW information – do not just summarize what I said or what you read from the textbook.  DO NOT just state “I wanted to learn more about X.” You write the answer to what you wanted to learn.  attached the file that u will get the information below. ( no outside source needs – write a new information based on what you read using your knowledge of the law in your own words)

4. Write a few sentences about a tort involved in any civil lawsuit in the united states only that has recently been in the news. Attach the news story. a screenshot of the page)  This a story by a reporter about real people in the news in the last couple of weeks. 

12/15/20, 11:59 PMPrint Preview

Page 1 of 2https://ng.cengage.com/static/nbreader/ui/apps/nbreader/print_preview/print_preview.html?

Chapter : Appendix: Summarized Cases Spotlight Case 2.1 Gucci America, Inc. v. Wang Huoqing
Book Title: The Legal Environment Today
Printed By: abdallah al balushi (abdallah.albalushi@student.csulb.edu)
© 2020 Cengage Learning, Inc., Cengage Learning, Inc.

Spotlight Case 2.1 Gucci America, Inc. v. Wang Huoqing
United States District Court, Northern District of California, 2011 WL 30972 (2011).

Facts

Wang Huoqing, a resident of the People’s Republic of China, operates numerous websites.
When Gucci discovered that Huoqing’s websites were selling counterfeit goods—products
that carried Gucci’s trademarks but were not genuine Gucci articles—it hired a private
investigator in San Jose, California, to buy goods from the websites. The investigator
purchased a wallet that was labeled Gucci but was counterfeit.

Gucci filed a trademark infringement lawsuit against Huoqing in a federal district court in
California seeking damages and an injunction to prevent further infringement. Huoqing was
notified of the lawsuit via e-mail but did not appear in court. Gucci asked the court to enter a
default judgment—that is, a judgment entered when the defendant fails to appear. The court
first had to determine whether it had personal jurisdiction over Huoqing based on the
Internet sales.

Issue

Could a U.S. federal court exercise personal jurisdiction over a resident of China whose only
contact with the United States was through an interactive website that advertised and sold
counterfeit goods?

Decision

Yes. The U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California held that it had personal
jurisdiction over the foreign defendant, Huoqing. The court entered a default judgment
against Huoqing and granted Gucci an injunction.

Reason

The court reasoned that the due process clause allows a federal court to exercise
jurisdiction over a defendant who has had sufficient minimum contacts with the court’s forum

12/15/20, 11:59 PMPrint Preview

Page 2 of 2https://ng.cengage.com/static/nbreader/ui/apps/nbreader/print_preview/print_preview.html?

—the place where the court exercises jurisdiction. Specifically, jurisdiction exists when

1. the nonresident defendant engages in some act or transaction with the forum “by
which he purposefully avails himself of the privilege of conducting activities in the
forum, thereby invoking the benefits and protections of its laws;

2. the claim must be one which arises out of or results from the defendant’s forum-
related activities; and

3. exercise of jurisdiction must be reasonable.”

To determine whether Huoqing had purposefully conducted business activities in California,
the court used a sliding-scale analysis. Under this analysis, passive websites do not create
sufficient contacts for such a finding, but interactive sites may do so. Huoqing’s websites
were fully interactive. In addition, Gucci presented evidence that Huoqing had advertised
and sold the counterfeited goods within the court’s district, and that he had made one actual
sale within the district—the sale to Gucci’s private investigator.

Critical Thinking

What If the Facts Were Different? Suppose that Gucci had not presented
evidence that Huoqing made one actual sale through his website to a resident
(the private investigator) of the court’s district. Would the court still have found
that it had personal jurisdiction over Huoqing? Why or why not?

Legal Environment Is it relevant to the analysis of jurisdiction that Gucci
America’s principal place of business is in New York rather than California?
Explain.

Chapter : Appendix: Summarized Cases Spotlight Case 2.1 Gucci America, Inc. v. Wang Huoqing
Book Title: The Legal Environment Today
Printed By: abdallah al balushi (abdallah.albalushi@student.csulb.edu)
© 2020 Cengage Learning, Inc., Cengage Learning, Inc.

© 2020 Cengage Learning Inc. All rights reserved. No part of this work may by reproduced or used in any form or by any means –
graphic, electronic, or mechanical, or in any other manner – without the written permission of the copyright holder.