Federal Jurisdiction

News & Analysis as of

Apotex Inc. v. Daiichi Sankyo, Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2015)

Can a Federal district court ever have subject-matter jurisdiction to hear a declaratory judgment action of non-infringement for a disclaimed patent? Of course, the Federal Circuit explained this week in the Apotex Inc. v....more

Court Dismisses Case For No Diversity Jurisdiction 2 Days After Filing

In an unusual display of speedy discretion, federal District Judge Sheri Polster Chappell wasted no time in dismissing the complaint on a public works payment bond filed by Advance Industrial Coating, LLC in Advance Indus....more

What’s a Significant Nexus? The Answer, My Friend, Is Flowin’ Through the Ditch.

Even assuming that the “significant nexus” test from Justice Kennedy’s concurring opinion in Rapanos defines waters of the United States subject to Clean Water Act jurisdiction, the question remains what establishes a...more

Tax Injunction Act Does Not Bar Suit by Online Retailers Trade Association, But May Not Be the Last Word on Taxation of Online...

The U.S. Supreme Court unanimously held on March 3 that the Tax Injunction Act does not bar a lawsuit brought by the Direct Marketing Association, a trade association of retailers, challenging the enforcement of a Colorado...more

Judge Posner on Bankruptcy’s "Clean-Up" Jurisdiction

Most bankruptcy lawyers might think that the dismissal of a bankruptcy proceeding and the revesting of the bankruptcy estate’s assets in the debtor bring an end to the bankruptcy court’s jurisdiction....more

Do Medical Records Support Removal And Do Unripe Claims Get Dismissed

In Alilin v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., No. 6:14-cv-1183-Orl-41DAB (D. for M.D. Fla., Jan. 30, 2015), Judge Carlos Mendoza denied Alilin's challenge to the amount in controversy prong of State Farm's removal to federal...more

To Remove or Not To Remove?

When the Class Action Fairness Act was passed ten years ago, many businesses breathed a collective sigh of relief. No longer would the plaintiffs' bar be able to keep their cases in certain magnet jurisdictions (a/k/a...more

The Prospect of a Federal Trade Secret Claim

Trade secrets constitute the only category of intellectual property that is governed primarily by state law. This status may soon change—two bills, House Bill 5233 and Senate Bill 2267 were introduced in Congress last term to...more

No Safe Haven: DOJ Can and Will Seize Proceeds of Wholly Foreign Corruption

Nine pieces of real property in the New Orleans area purchased and owned by Honduran government official Mario Roberto Zelaya Rojas (“Zelaya”) are proceeds of criminal activity and subject to seizure, according to a civil...more

Amber Coyle v. Michael O’Rourke - USDC, C.D. Cal., January 5, 2015

In Depth - Plaintiff models sue defendants in California state court for statutory invasion of privacy and common law misappropriation, and, following removal, district court remands because subject matter of state law...more

Year in Review: NLRB Edition

With the new year upon us, we have rounded up some of the most important NLRB decisions of 2014. By all accounts, the NLRB was as active as ever in 2014. Its decisions and rulemaking will preoccupy HR and LR professionals in...more

Supreme Court Clarifies Class Action Removal Pleading Standard

The US Supreme Court recently held that under the Class Action Fairness Act (CAFA), a defendant need not provide proof of the amount in controversy in its notice of removal to federal court. Only a plausible allegation is...more

Eleventh Circuit Affirms CAFA-Based Remand Order

Just two weeks after the Supreme Court’s decision in Dart Cherokee Basin Operating Co., LLC v. Owens, the Eleventh Circuit affirmed a CAFA-based remand order where the defendant failed to establish by a preponderance of the...more

Third Circuit Weighs In On Burden of Proof and Evidentiary Standards Applicable to Cases Removed Under CAFA

Days before the Supreme Court’s decision addressing the requirements for CAFA notices of removal in Dart Cherokee Basin Operating Co., LLC v. Owens, the Third Circuit addressed the evidentiary requirements for surviving a...more

Supreme Court Establishes New Standards: Removal Pleadings Now Less Burdensome For State Court Suits

Last week, the United States Supreme Court held that a notice of removal from state court to federal court requires only pleading good faith allegations that the amount in controversy exceeds a jurisdictional threshold. The...more

Who Needs Proof? Not The Notice of Removal.

In a previous blog, we explained that the Supreme Court was considering whether a defendant merely has to allege jurisdictional facts or provide evidence regarding the amount in controversy when removing a case....more

Supreme Court Clarifies the Standard Governing Removal of Class Action Cases to Federal Court

The US Supreme Court ruled last Monday that class action defendants need not provide evidentiary submissions in support of their attempts to remove a case from state to federal court. Rather, they need only include in their...more

Removing a Barrier: The Supreme Court Holds That, Under CAFA, Notices of Removal Need Not Include Evidence Supporting the Amount...

On December 15, 2014, the United States Supreme Court held in Dart Cherokee Basin Operating Co., LLC v. Owens that a class action defendant need only allege the requisite amount of controversy “plausibly” in the notice of...more

Supreme Court Confirms That A Notice Of Removal Requires Only A “Plausible Allegation” That The Amount In Controversy Has Been Met

The Supreme Court has held that a notice of removal requires only a “plausible allegation that the amount in controversy exceeds the jurisdictional threshold,” and confirmed that a notice of removal need not include evidence...more

Supreme Court: Companies Fighting State Class Actions Can Remove to Federal Court Without Evidence of Damages

The Class Action Fairness Act of 2005 (“CAFA”) has found its way to the steps of the U.S. Supreme Court several times in the last two years, as plaintiffs and defendants seek to define the parameters of the federal law...more

Aviation & Aerospace and Surface Transportation Quarterly Newsletter

In This Issue: - Update on Developments in California Drone Law - One Community Gets Relief from Aircraft Noise - California Once Again Relinquishes Clean Air Act Enforcement Responsibility to the...more

Supreme Court Clarifies Class Action Fairness Act’s Removal Requirement: 'Liberal Rules' Do Not Require Evidence of Amount in...

Class action defendants need not include evidence regarding the amount in controversy when removing a case to federal court under the Class Action Fairness Act (“CAFA”), thanks to the United States Supreme Court’s decision in...more

U.S. Supreme Court Clarifies Requirements for Removing Class Actions to Federal Court

Today the U.S. Supreme Court issued its decision in Dart Cherokee Basin Operating Co. v. Owens, No. 13-719, a case involving the procedural requirements for removing a class action from state to federal court under the Class...more

SCOTUS Rules CAFA Removal Notices Need Contain Only a Plausible Allegation That Amount in Controversy is Satisfied

On December 15, 2014, the Supreme Court of the United States decided a critical issue regarding Class Action Fairness Act of 2005 (CAFA) removals. Specifically, the Supreme Court settled a controversy surrounding what...more

Supreme Court Simplifies Removal from State Courts

Yesterday, the Supreme Court relieved decades of uncertainty concerning the filing requirements for removal of cases to federal court from state court by holding that a defendant is required only to file “a short and plain...more

112 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 5

All the intelligence you need, in one easy email:

Great! Your first step to building an email digest of JD Supra authors and topics. Log in with LinkedIn so we can start sending your digest...

Sign up for your custom alerts now, using LinkedIn ›

* With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name.
×