In That Case: Securities and Exchange Commission v. Jarkesy
The Justice Insiders Podcast: Jarkesy’s Implications for the Administrative State
5 Key Takeaways | ITC Litigation and Enforcement Conference
Recent Trends in Article III Standing - The Consumer Finance Podcast
AGG Talks: Background Screening - A Refresher on Responding to Consumer File Requests under Section 609 of the FCRA
#WorkforceWednesday: SCOTUS in Review, Biden Acts to Limit Non-Competes, NY HERO Act Model Safety Plans - Employment Law This Week®
SCOTUS Watch: The ACA and Key Health Law Areas Justice Barrett Could Impact - Diagnosing Health Care Podcast
Podcast: Texas v. United States of America
Polsinelli Podcasts - Supreme Court Closes Gap on Bankruptcy Issue
Yonas Fikre, a U.S. citizen who had emigrated from Sudan, found himself placed on the No Fly List by the FBI and unable to return to the United States from an international trip. This action followed Fikre’s having been...more
In a setback to the SEC’s and other federal agencies’ use of administrative law judges (“ALJs”) to conduct in-house enforcement proceedings, the U.S. Supreme Court recently issued a unanimous decision in Axon Enterprise, Inc....more
Defense arguments about a plaintiff’s lack of standing in federal court can come back to bite them, as shown by the Southern District of Florida’s recent decision in Guerra v. Newport Beach Auto. Grp. LLC, No. 21-20568, 2021...more
Usually, it is the plaintiff that argues he or she was injured, not the defendant. But, in an effort to stay in state court, some TCPA plaintiffs have taken the counterintuitive position that they did not suffer an injury in...more
As the Baron reported last month, we’ve seen a recent trend in which plaintiffs have been using their own lack of Article III standing as a means to avoid federal jurisdiction. Yet again, we have another culprit… this time, a...more
We’re closely tracking the recent trend involving plaintiffs’ use of their lack of Article III standing as a basis to avoid federal jurisdiction. Last week we reported on a case in the Northern District of California that was...more
Addressing the issue of federal jurisdiction based on a lack of Art. III standing by plaintiff, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed a district court’s dismissal of a claim for correction of inventorship...more
When faced with someone who is blowing things out of proportion, one response might be "Don't make a federal case out of this!" Sometimes, it may not even be possible to make a federal case. The reason is that federal...more
To establish federal jurisdiction in a declaratory judgment action, two conditions must be satisfied. First, is the constitutional inquiry - the case must be a ‘case or controversy’ pursuant to Article III of the US...more
If a putative class of plaintiffs, all citizens of State A, sues a corporate defendant, which the law considers to be a citizen of State A and State B, in state court, may the defendant remove the case to federal court under...more
I can count on one hand the number of federal court cases I’ve featured on this blog since I started it almost 10 years ago — and that’s no coincidence....more
Since it was filed in a California federal court in July 2012, we have been following Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) v. Chance Edward Gordon, a case in which the CFPB alleged that an attorney duped consumers by...more
This is the ninth edition of The Class Action Chronicle, a quarterly publication that provides an analysis of recent class action trends, along with a summary of class certification and Class Action Fairness Act rulings...more
The U.S. Supreme Court recently granted certiorari in Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins, No. 13-1339 (SCOTUSblog page), to decide whether a plaintiff who does not suffer any injury has Article III standing to sue for violation of a...more
The United States Supreme Court has granted certiorari to decide whether a statutory violation alone, unaccompanied by any actual harm to the plaintiff, is sufficient to establish Article III standing. See Spokeo, Inc. v....more
The U.S. Supreme Court this week agreed to hear a highly watched privacy case which will have great significance in the rapidly changing area of privacy law....more
In an important move that may clarify standing in a variety of consumer cases, the U.S. Supreme Court on April 27, 2015 granted review in Robins v. Spokeo, Inc., 742 F.3d 409 (9th Cir. 2014), cert. granted, 135 S. Ct. 323...more
Since the Constitution was ratified, 226 years ago, potential plaintiffs have been required to first establish that they have a “case or controversy” before a court can consider the merits of any legal claim. As the U.S....more
Zombie or no-injury plaintiffs seeking to represent zombie or no-injury classes are on the rise. In these suits, plaintiff was not injured, and there’s no way to prove who, if anyone, in the class was. Thomas Robins is one of...more
The Supreme Court recently accepted review of one of the most talked about privacy class action and consumer cases of the past year, Robins v. Spokeo, Inc., No. 13-1339 (U.S.). The issue before the Court is whether Congress...more
On April 27, 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari in Spokeo Inc. v. Robins, Case Number 13-1339. The issue raised by the certiorari petition was whether Congress may confer Article III standing upon a plaintiff who...more
The U.S. Supreme Court agreed yesterday to hear an important case that will decide whether a plaintiff who cannot show any actual harm from a violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act nevertheless has standing under Article...more
The Supreme Court yesterday morning granted Spokeo, Inc.’s petition for a writ of certiorari in the closely watched case of Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins, No. 13-1339. The case presents the question as to whether defendants can be...more
On April 27 the United States Supreme Court granted certiorari in Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins, setting the stage for the high court to resolve a critical standing question that is an issue in almost all online privacy cases:...more