The U.S. Supreme Court issued its potentially most significant preemption decision in several years, Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp. v. Albright, 587 U.S. ____ (2019), reversing what some had dubbed the worst drug and device...more
5/22/2019
/ Agency Disapproval ,
Clear Evidence Standard ,
Failure To Warn ,
FDA Approval ,
Federal v State Law Application ,
Food and Drug Administration (FDA) ,
Judicial Authority ,
Jury Trial ,
Manufacturers ,
Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp. v. Albrecht ,
Preemption ,
Prescription Drugs ,
Question of Fact ,
Question of Law ,
Remand ,
SCOTUS ,
State Law Claims ,
Vacated ,
Warning Labels
On February 27, 2019, the Supreme Court of the United States decided Jam v. International Finance Corp., No. 17-1011, holding that the International Organizations Immunities Act of 1945 grants international organizations the...more
2/28/2019
/ Absolute Immunity ,
Appeals ,
Foreign Governments ,
Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act of 1976 (FSIA) ,
Foreign Sovereigns ,
Immunity ,
International Litigation ,
International Organizations ,
International Organizations Immunities Act of 1945 ,
Jam v International Finance Corporation ,
Qualified Immunity ,
Reversal ,
SCOTUS ,
Statutory Interpretation
On February 26, 2019, the Supreme Court of the United States decided Nutraceutical Corp. v. Lambert, holding that Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(f)’s requirement that a party petition a federal appeals court for...more
2/28/2019
/ Class Action ,
Class Certification ,
Collective Actions ,
Decertification ,
Equitable Tolling ,
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure ,
Filing Deadlines ,
FRCP 23(f) ,
Interlocutory Appeals ,
Leave to Appeal ,
Motion for Reconsideration ,
Nutraceutical Corp v Lambert ,
SCOTUS
On February 25, 2019, the U.S. Supreme Court decided Yovino v. Rizo, holding that the federal courts may not count the vote of a judge who dies before the decision is issued, even if the judge had indicated a vote before he...more
On November 27, 2018, the Supreme Court of the United States decided Weyerhaeuser Company v. U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, No. 17-71, holding that (1) an area is eligible for designation as a “critical habitat” under the...more
On November 6, 2018, the Supreme Court of the United States decided Mount Lemon Fire District v. Guido, No. 17-587, holding that the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA) applies to States and political...more
On June 22, 2018, the Supreme Court decided WesternGeco LLC v. ION Geophysical Corp., No. 16-1011, holding that the damages provision of the Patent Act, 35 U.S.C. § 284, allows a plaintiff to recover lost foreign profits...more
6/25/2018
/ 35 U.S.C. § 271(f)(2) ,
35 U.S.C. § 284 ,
Appeals ,
Damages ,
Domestic Injury ,
Extraterritoriality Rules ,
Foreign Sales ,
Lost Profits ,
Patent Act ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patents ,
Remand ,
SCOTUS ,
Vacated ,
WesternGeco LLC v Ion Geophysical Corporation
On June 22, 2018, the United States Supreme Court decided Carpenter v. U.S., No. 16-402, holding that law enforcement, absent exigent circumstances, must get a warrant to obtain cell-site location information (CSLI) that...more
6/25/2018
/ Carpenter v US ,
Cell Phones ,
Cell Site Location Information (CSLI) ,
Criminal Convictions ,
Electronic Records ,
Electronically Stored Information ,
Exigent Circumstances ,
Fourth Amendment ,
Geolocation ,
Location Data ,
Probable Cause ,
Reasonable Expectation of Privacy ,
Remand ,
Reversal ,
SCOTUS ,
Third-Party ,
Warrantless Searches
On June 11, 2018, the United States Supreme Court decided Jon Husted, Ohio Secretary of State v. A. Philip Randolph Institute, et al., No. 16-980, holding that Ohio’s procedures for removing voters from its voter registration...more
On June 11, 2018, the Supreme Court of the United States decided China Agritech, Inc. v. Resh, No. 17-432, holding that a member of a failed federal class action may not use the tolling rule of American Pipe & Construction...more
On June 4, 2018, the Supreme Court of the United States decided Lamar, Archer & Cofrin, LLP v. Appling, No. 16-1215, holding that a statement about a single asset can be a “statement respecting the debtor’s financial...more
6/5/2018
/ Adversary Proceedings ,
Appeals ,
Bankruptcy Code ,
Business Assets ,
Chapter 7 ,
Commercial Bankruptcy ,
Congressional Intent ,
Debtors ,
Dischargeable Debts ,
False Statements ,
Judgment Creditors ,
Lamar Archer & Cofrin LLP v Appling ,
Oral Communications ,
Reaffirmation ,
SCOTUS ,
Tax Returns
On June 4, 2018, the Supreme Court of the United States decided Masterpiece Cakeshop, Ltd. v. Colorado Civil Rights Commission, No. 16-111, holding that the Colorado Civil Rights Commission violated the Free Exercise Clause...more
On April 24, 2018, the Supreme Court decided Oil States Energy Services, LLC v. Greene’s Energy Group, LLC, No. 16-712, holding that the “ inter partes” review process established by the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act of...more
On April 24, 2018, the Supreme Court decided Jesner v. Arab Bank, PLC, No. 16-499, holding that foreign corporations may not be defendants in suits brought under the Alien Tort Statute (ATS), 28 U.S.C. § 1350....more
On April 24, 2018, the Supreme Court of the United States decided SAS Institute Inc. v. Iancu, No. 16-969, holding that when the United States Patent and Trademark Office institutes an inter partes review, it must decide the...more
On February 21, 2018, the United States Supreme Court decided Murphy v. Smith, No. 16-1067, holding that when a prisoner receives a judgment under certain civil rights statutes, the district court must apply as much of the...more
2/22/2018
/ 42 U.S.C. §1983 ,
Appeals ,
Attorney's Fees ,
Civil Rights Act ,
Judicial Discretion ,
Money Judgment ,
Murphy v Smith ,
Prison Guards ,
Prisoners ,
Reaffirmation ,
Reversal ,
SCOTUS
On June 19, 2107 the U.S. Supreme Court decided Rubin v. Islamic Republic of Iran, holding that the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act allows some but not all of the property of a state sponsor of terrorism to be attached to...more
On June 19, 2107 the U.S. Supreme Court decided Digital Realty Trust v. Somers, holding that the Dodd-Frank Act’s prohibition on employer retaliation against whistleblowers extends only to individuals who have reported...more
2/22/2018
/ Anti-Retaliation Provisions ,
Digital Realty Trust Inc v Somers ,
Dodd-Frank ,
Internal Reporting ,
Rule 21F ,
Sarbanes-Oxley ,
SCOTUS ,
Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) ,
Securities Violations ,
Whistleblower Protection Policies ,
Whistleblowers
On February 20, 2018, the U.S. Supreme Court decided CNH Industrial N.V. v. Reese, holding in a per curium opinion that collective-bargaining agreements are to be interpreted according to ordinary principles of contract law,...more
On June 22, 2017 the U.S. Supreme Court decided Maslenjak v. United States, holding that to revoke naturalized citizenship based on a crime committed in the naturalization process, the government must show that the crime had...more
At the end of 2016, we highlighted the United States Supreme Court’s hearing of Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Superior Court as a decision “of great concern to drug and device companies” as it pertains to plaintiff forum...more
On June 19, 2017, the United States Supreme Court decided Ziglar v. Abbasi, No. 15-1358, which was consolidated with Ashcroft v. Abbasi, No. 15-1359 and Hasty v. Abbasi, No. 15-1363, holding that detention-policy claims...more
On June 19, 2107 the U.S. Supreme Court decided Matal v. Tam, holding that the Lanham Act’s prohibition on registering federal trademarks that “disparage” any person violates the First Amendment.
The Lanham Act prohibits...more
On June 19, 2017, the United States Supreme Court decided Packingham v. North Carolina, No. 15-1194, holding that a North Carolina statute that bars registered sex offenders from accessing social networking websites that...more
On June 19, 2107 the U.S. Supreme Court decided Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Superior Court, holding that in determining whether a forum’s exercise of specific personal jurisdiction over a party complies with the Fourteenth...more