question: Life Technologies Corp. v. Promega Corp. was a case decided by the Chief Justice that took his seat on what date?
answer: September 29, 2005
context: Title: John Roberts
  Passage: John Glover Roberts Jr. (born January 27, 1955) is the 17th and current Chief Justice of the United States.  He took his seat on September 29, 2005, having been nominated by President George W. Bush after the death of chief justice William Rehnquist.  He has been described as having a conservative judicial philosophy in his jurisprudence.
  Title: Dr. Bonham's Case
  Passage: Thomas Bonham v College of Physicians, commonly known as Dr. Bonham's Case or simply Bonham's Case, was a case decided in 1610 by the Court of Common Pleas in England, under Sir Edward Coke, the court's Chief Justice, who explained why he thought that "in many cases, the common law will control Acts of Parliament".  Coke's meaning has been disputed over the years.  According to one interpretation, Coke intended the kind of judicial review that would later develop in the United States, but other scholars believe that Coke meant only to construe a statute, not to challenge parliamentary sovereignty.  If Coke intended the former, he may have later changed his view.  The statement by Coke is sometimes considered to be "obiter dicta", rather than part of the "ratio decidendi" of the case.  Dr Bonham's case was a statement that engaging in peaceful and honest trade without a piece of parchment called a "license" was not a "crime", and that no command of the monarch or Act of the Monarch in Parliament could make engaging in peaceful and honest trade without a piece of parchment called a "license" a "crime".
  Title: Life Technologies Corp. v. Promega Corp.
  Passage: Life Technologies Corp. v. Promega Corp., 580 U.S. ___ (2017), was a case in which the United States Supreme Court clarified the application of the Patent Act of 1952 to the sale of components of patented inventions in foreign markets.  In an opinion written by Associate Justice Sonia Sotomayor, the Court held that the sale of a "single component" in a foreign market "does not constitute a substantial portion of the components that can give rise to liability under [the Patent Act of 1952]."  Justice Samuel Alito wrote an opinion concurring in part and concurring in the judgment, in which he was joined Justice Clarence Thomas.  Chief Justice John Roberts took no part in the decision of the case.
  Title: Hite v. Fairfax
  Passage: Hite v. Fairfax, (Original Case Citation: 4 Call 42) 8 Va. 42 (1786) was a case decided by the Supreme Court of Virginia that upheld the original title of land granted to Thomas Fairfax, 6th Lord Fairfax of Cameron over what was known as the Northern Neck of Virginia, a large tract of land located between the headwaters of the Potomac and Rappahannock Rivers claimed by Jost Hite.  Future Chief Justice of the United States John Marshall successfully represented the successors of Fairfax to the title.  The land currently makes up what is currently considered Northern Virginia and the Fairfax namesake county, Fairfax County, comprises the majority of this land.
  Title: Copperweld Corp. v. Independence Tube Corp.
  Passage: Copperweld Corp. v. Independence Tube Corp., 467 U.S. 752 (1984) , is a major US antitrust law case decided by the Supreme Court concerning the Pittsburgh firm Copperweld Corporation and the Chicago firm Independence Tube.  It that held that a parent company is incapable of conspiring with its wholly owned subsidiary for purposes of Section 1 of the Sherman Act because they cannot be considered separate economic entities.  Section 1 of the Sherman Act states that "Every contract, combination in the form of trust or otherwise, or conspiracy, in restraint of trade or commerce among the several States, or with foreign nations, is declared to be illegal."  However, for a condition of conspiracy to exist, there must be at least two parties involved.  "Copperweld" held that separate incorporation was not enough to render a parent and its subsidiary capable of conspiring, since forcibly the economic interests of a wholly owned subsidiary must be those of its parent.  It does not apply to partially owned subsidiaries.
  Title: Jay Court
  Passage: The Jay Court refers to the Supreme Court of the United States from 1789 to 1795, when John Jay served as the first Chief Justice of the United States.  Jay served as Chief Justice until his resignation, at which point John Rutledge took office as a recess appointment.  The Supreme Court was established in Article III of the United States Constitution, but the workings of the federal court system were largely laid out by the Judiciary Act of 1789, which set the size of the Supreme Court at six seats.  The court had its first public session in February 1790, but did not decide its first case until 1791.  The court met first in New York City, but moved with the rest of the federal government to Philadelphia in 1791.  In addition to their duties as a court, each justice spent much of his time riding circuit outside of the capital.  The court decided relatively few cases, and perhaps the most important legacy of the court was its refusal to issue an advisory opinion sought by President George Washington, establishing a precedent that the court only hears cases and controversies.  The relative unimportance of the Supreme Court at this time is perhaps best exemplified by the fact that Jay, the sitting Chief Justice, traveled to the United Kingdom in 1794 to negotiate the Jay Treaty for the Washington Administration.
  Title: Y Chromosome Haplotype Reference Database
  Passage: The Y Chromosome Haplotype Reference Database (YHRD) is an open access, annotated collection of population samples typed for Y chromosomal sequence variants.  Two important objectives are pursued: (1) the generation of reliable frequency estimates for Y-STR Haplotypes and Y-SNP Haplotypes to be used in the quantitative assessment of matches in forensic and kinship cases and (2) the characterization of male lineages to draw conclusions about the origins and history of human populations.  Since its creation in 1999 it has been curated by Lutz Roewer and Sascha Willuweit at the Institute of Legal Medicine and Forensic Sciences, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin.  The database is endorsed by the International Society for Forensic Genetics (ISFG) and partially funded by Life Technologies and Promega Corporation.
  Title: Celotex Corp. v. Catrett
  Passage: Celotex Corp. v. Catrett, 477 U.S. 317 (1986), was a case decided by the United States Supreme Court, written by then-Associate Justice William Rehnquist.  In "Celotex", the Court held that a party moving for summary judgment need only show that the opposing party lacks evidence sufficient to support its case.
  Title: United States v. Barker
  Passage: United States v. Barker, 15 U.S. 395 (1817), was a case decided by the United States Supreme Court upholding the common law tradition that private citizens may not demand costs from the federal government.  The case involved a motion for costs filed against the United States Government and resolved the previously unanswered question of whether courts could award costs against the United States federal government.  The Court's opinion read, in its entirety, "[t]he United States never pay costs."  Jurists have remarked that Chief Justice John Marshall's six-word opinion is one of the shortest Supreme Court cases ever written.
  Title: American Insurance Co. v. 356 Bales of Cotton
  Passage: American Insurance Company v. 356 Bales of Cotton, 26 U.S. 511 (1828) , was a case decided by the Supreme Court of the United States.  The case involved the validity of a local court established by Congress in the Florida Territory whose judges lacked life tenure, as mandated by Article III of the Constitution.  Chief Justice John Marshall upheld the courts on the basis of Congress's broad power to enact local laws for territories under Article IV, Section 3, Clause 2 of the Constitution.  The case was later discussed in "Dred Scott v. Sandford", where Chief Justice Roger Taney distinguished it in holding that Congress could not ban slavery within a territory.
citations: Life Technologies Corp. v. Promega Corp. John Roberts