Mefloquine is not recommended for severe malaria infections, particularly infections from "P. falciparum", which should be treated with intravenous antimalarials. Mefloquine does not eliminate parasites in the liver phase of the disease, and people with "P. vivax" malaria should be treated with a second drug that is effective for the liver phase, such as primaquine. Mefloquine is widely used for the treatment of malaria in pregnancy. Limited data suggests that it is safe for this purpose. Resistance to mefloquine is now common around the west border in Cambodia and other parts of Southeast Asia. The mechanism of resistance is by increase
People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals v. Doughney court ruled that Doughney violated the ACPA. However, the court further held that PETA was not entitled to damages because Doughney registered and used the domain prior to ACPA's enactment. Instead Doughney was merely required to surrender the domain. The court ruled that PETA was ineligible for an award of attorney's fees because Doughney did not maliciously infringe the trademark because he was creating a parody and had a First Amendment right to do so. People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals v. Doughney People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals v. Doughney, 263 F.3d 359 (4th Cir. 2001), was